Introduction and preliminary explanations
These notes have been written parallel to actual research, so
it seems reasonable to place description of that and that interview
or running analysis at their position in time. Structurally it
had to be a kind of climbing up, step by step, from the lowest
level to the higher one, but life itself made certain corrections
to that scheme inevitable, as my research ran parallel to electorial
debate in D.C. getting more heat and venom to it every week. I've
preserved personal remarks to the events of 7 weeks in the Capitol
City, starting from July 6 and ending in August 26, 1994.
Being long engaged in urban development policy in Russia I underwent
a long road before getting to understand the crucial significance
of the neighborhood community for building democratic counterweight
to the Municipal bureaucracy omnipotence. Natural enough to use
my longer visit to USA to learn as much as possible about dramatic
History of neighborhood communities in action. But why Washington
of all places? None of Washington D.C. neighborhood communities
had got Nationwide appraisal or was awarded for astonishing results
of their activity. It would be easy to find far more spectacular
examples in Philadelphia or Phoenix and elsewhere and yet I think
it most substantial to undertake preliminary research in Washington
D.C.
Strange as it is, not many researchers have shown much interest
to Washington D.C, as a living City. Definitely, the National
Capital is not as intriguing as New York with its Babylon touch,
nor as appraised for its architecture as Chicago, nor as socially
strained as Detroit etc. And yet Washington D.C. is of great interest
especially for a Muscovite who is experiencing seemingly similar
problems with his/her own City. The very fact that functioning
as a National Capital does heavily burden the City itself in both
cases, make investigation intriguing enough. For someone from
Moscow which had been squeezed and crushed by that very functioning
to an unprecedented degree, the fact that attempts to humanize
the city in a down-up manner have been at least partly successful
in Washington, is of tremendous value. Any Capital City has got
problems with defining the border between it being a center of
governmental bureaucracy and it being the place where ordinary
people manage to live. Any Capital City shares problems brought
by hordes of guests and tourists crowding its streets. Any National
Capital is the most expensive place to live in the Country it
is expected to control.
There is remarkable dissimilarity nevertheless and any Capital
City would be best understood if treated like an entity in itself,
as environment highly individualized. And still the eternal conflict
between the Capital-in function and the living City is universal.
That allows us to lay aside the fact that Washington is relatively
small in comparison with London, Moscow, Paris or Berlin, that
in contrast to European capitals, it has never had big Industry,
so it is practically free from necessity to oust that troublesome
heritage, but is most suffering from being near to monofunctional.
If we were to consider the Postindustrial City, then its ability
to produce information and to distribute it Nation-wide and World-wide
would be a primary asset, and to that criterium Moscow and Washington
would seem alike. What is important to stress is the biggest discrepancy
between Washington and Moscow, which lies in the fact that quite
an important part of Washingtonian political and intellectual
elite would be reshuffled every four years, adding strongly to
the mobility factor, while till this moment Moscow has preserved
its one-pole magnet character. Moscow absorbs more human energy
than lets it out, so that neither emigration nor quasi-emigration
(nobody has revealed statistics as yet, but thousands of Muscovites
are working in the West for years with but short visits home)
since Perestroyka years could not play any important role. The
other important difference lies in a known fact that Moscow's
input to National Economy has been ever bigger, than its share
in the National Budget spending, while Washington seems to be
a consuming area par excellence. Speaking in a pure theoretical
way, this incongruity would mean that Moscow would have far bigger
active citizens' movement than D.C., and yet nobody would be too
much surprised to know that the order of things has been reverse.
As anybody knows, one can not observe new phenomena without
comparing it to one's previous experience, so, whenever speaking
on Washington D.C. I am bound by compulsion to think about Moscow.
Washington has long been first Capital, then the City. Moscow
has been first the Capital, then — one of the biggest Industrial
agglomerations, then — an intellectual center, then — a huge and
loose agglomeration of high-rise housing, never a City. What makes
me think Washington and Moscow comparable is artificiality of
a Place. While so many words were spent to stress artificiality
of St.-Petersburg in Russian literature, artificiality of Moscow
has always been masked by its long History, by its being a Place
for so many Centuries. Time is not as important as in Europe,
when having Russia in mind, and though many things have been changing,
and the urban tissue is not the same it used to be, the City structure
the City "shape" have preserved practically intact.
It is worth notion that, though some citizens associations in
Washington have been operating 50 years or more, Washingtonians
have initiated the movement towards their City self-identification
for good just a little earlier than their Moscow counterpart.
After their upstart in mid-80s, about 500 Self-government commissions
or committees have been registered in Moscow, so formally the
two parallel processes might be comparable. Comparable as well
is an explicit shift from the initial "counter-anything"
attitude of the grass-root movements to their partial collaboration
with the municipal authorities, that has taken place with the
end of the 80s in Washington and from 1993 on in Moscow. Comparable
is the fact that in both Cities but a small fraction of population
really cares, that the number of active citizens that would devote
a lot of their time to common affairs is in both cases relatively
small, and any commission or association would rarely enlist more
than 40 to 50 active members who are able to get support from
something like 10 to 15 people each. One might add that in both
cases the bulk of the volunteers' corps at any commission would
be comprised to a great degree of people agitated over than average,
of lonely women with kids and of ambitious men who could not have
achieved the level of success in their professional life, they
would consider satisfactory. And last but not least, in both cases
one would expect that the lowest level of social organization
would be used as a spring-board by ambitious young politicians,
yet till this moment it is not so in Moscow, where elections to
the so-called Municipal Districts Boards have been postponed several
times through 1994.
With so many similarities actualized or potential in mind, I've
long wished to know more about Washington D.C. as an urban arena
where social action has well started to emerge through a thick
layer of the Capital functions. I've got certain first-hand experience
in understanding urban self-government issues in Berlin and London,
so the only thing I had to be cautious with, was a self-imposed
taboo or any preconceived opinion as to what self-government is
and how it operates. The eyes were to be wide open first, reasoning
should be invited a little later.
Curiosity has been accompanied by pragmatic interest toward
the state of the art, as, trying hard to play in earnest my role
of an adviser to the Moscow Mayor's Office, I felt obliged to
find those simple tools of linking the Local, i.e. the Community
at its neighborhood level, and the whole of the City, that might
be useful for the Moscow Statute project — soon to be presented
for the first reading at the Moscow Duma (Council).
I am most grateful to the Woodrow Wilson Center and to its Director,
Blair Ruble in particular, for presenting me with a possibility
to proceed with this work in Summer, 1994. I am most thankful
to Margarita Gutman, Ney Dos Santos Oliviera and Anne Whiston
Spirn, whom I own much of understanding better my own City through
discussions within the "urban cluster" at WWCIS. I also
am to express my gratitude to many people who have devoted much
of their time to patient answering my numerous questions during
hours and hours of interviewing.
******
It is often reasonable to start, just diving in a given situation,
prior to reading through pages and pages of reports, articles
or surveys — especially on those cases, where information already
gathered definitely exceeds one's ability to study it all. Such
is for sure the case with both the Neighborhood Advisory Commissions
and the Civic Associations in D.C. There are too many of them
and certain monotony, being result of briefing their activity,
is forbidding. One would find it hard to penetrate deeper, using
written matter only and so, finding establishing contact at various
places quite easy, I've had to use the opportunity. The only exception
was the police officers, perhaps used to be cautious because of
the Mass Media impertinence and irrelevance, who as a rule asked
me to switch the tape-recorder off before answering the simplest
question.
Perhaps the most significant innovation in urban governance
coming with the Home Rule Charter, that gave Washington its City
Council and its elected Mayor, was the formation of official neighborhood
commissions in 1976 (section 738 of the Chart).
The ANCs are advisory boards composed of residents elected from
the District's neighborhoods. They are independent bodies which
advise the government on policy issues affecting their particular
neighborhoods. There are 37 such commissions in the District,
each divided into sub-areas called Single Member Districts (SMDs)
with about 2000 residents each. In all, there are 299 individual
Commissioners, representing these SMDs.
Formally, the ANCs consider a wide range of policies and programs
affecting their neighborhoods. These include traffic, parking,
recreation, street improvements, liquor licenses, zoning, economic
development, police protection, sanitation and trash collection
as well as the District's annual budget. In a sense, the ANCs
are the body of the government with the closest official ties
to the people in a neighborhood.
The law requires that ANCs be given prior notice before
proposed government action which affects the Commission area is
implemented. In many cases ANCs are given at least thirty days
written notice of proposed actions, and their formal comments
are invited. The law further specifies that comments from ANCs
must be given "great weight" when the final decisions
of the government are made. It is quite understandable that even
in an old Democracy like USA, the law in itself is not too much
unless it is imposed at any given situation, and I could quickly
discover that ANCs are not an exception to that general principle.
The operations of ANCs are funded by the District of Columbia
tax revenues. It is interesting that ANCs may not solicit funds
in excess of $400 from private sources, unless specifically authorized
by the Council. There are four basic requirements for an ANC Candidate:
- must be a registered voter in the District of Columbia;
- must be a resident of the Single Member District for at least
60 days prior to the filing of the nomination petition,
- must present to the Board of Elections a nominating petition
signed by at least 25 registered voters who reside in the SMD,
- must hold no other elected office (Mayor, Chairman or Member
of the Council, Member of the Board of Education, or Delegate
to the House).
So far the official side of the stage.
Case-study 1. ANC meeting. Palisades Station, 3D. July 11,
1994.
Scenery — a small hall belonging to the American University,
with which the ANC is struggling on one particular case, neat
and clean, though there is not enough light and acoustics is poor.
The meeting that started at 8.00 PM, took full 3 hours till 11
PM.
An affluent neighborhood of appr. 14.000 people, mainly White,
mainly living in their privately-owned houses. As it might be
expected, the agenda of the meeting deals not so much with Crime
or the Schools, yet first of all with preserving the quality of
the Place and its value. That's definitely a Place with distinctive
features and though particular houses would be aesthetically better
or worse, their appearance reveals high level of care and love.
Treasurer's report shows that of the money received from the
City-Hall ($8,000 for every Commissioner, as with any other ANC,
so, $56,000 the annual Budget) about $4,500 still were laid for
smaller grant-making to be provisioned for September). The Administrator's
letter (the woman has been doing part-time job for $1,360 a month)
concerning renewal of the contract for the next year with a 9%
increase was discussed and approved without longer debate. It's
interesting that the reason for an increase was never discussed,
provided that Administrator was doing her job well, and the only
question raised was about the earnings of Administrators at neighboring
ANCs. It is valid to notice that this personal question was discussed
with the petitioner coming out of the hall -in Russia that would
be impossible, and these minor differences are of utmost importance
when thinking about specific know-how to be transposed, borrowed
and implemented. Several features more are worth attention.
a. Not too many people were willing to attend the meeting and
of some thirty persons present at the beginning nearly two thirds
happily marched out after what proved to be the main point of
interest.
My later discussion with the Eleanor Lewis, the Chairlady, has
supported the observation brought from Russia that no more than
2.5% or 3% of the residents at best might be considered really
concerned citizens. The same proportion, or still less, was given
by my British and German colleagues from their experience. 3 of
a 100 seem to be a realistic ground for any program that would
include training for action and the like. I've never heard of
a bigger number and to a certain degree that both clarifies situation
and makes it practical. One would easily imagine working with
some 30 people who would stand for a Thousand, while to work with
several Hundreds (not in uniform) is near to impossible.
b. Both high living standard and education at the Palisades
should be considered a foundation for this particular ANC (as
well as some other ones of the same quality) to make real use
of its right to make an opinion on D.C. legislative acts and to
initiate their revision. One of the residents had proposed a highly
professional and elaborate project of change to "Probate
Reform Amendment Act of 1994" in order to introduce a "Flexible
System of Administration" for admitting a will to probate.
The proposal was taken with full understanding as local residents
would have too often felt in person or through working with their
clients, unnecessary hardships of probating real estate in D.C.
They would know how to compare that to the same procedure in other
States, i.e. they would be directly interested. No wonder that
project was approved without hesitation, being supported by the
opinion of the Chairlady who was the one to read it with attention.
The Bill 10-554 on "Juvenile Curfew Amendment Act of 1994"
to establish a curfew for juveniles under the age of 17 from 11
PM to 6 AM. Sunday through Thursday and 12 AM to 6 AM Friday and
Saturday met as much attention. And again, as it might be predicted,
at ANC 3D, this Bill was severely criticized on the ground that
it was one of those Acts that would be first of all impractical,
because the existing Police force was not enough to pursue the
goal and that the obvious goal — to have formal ground for detention
of petty drug traders among the juveniles — would be hard to tie
to the traditional Democracy values.
c. Status report on "Chicken Out Rotisserie" as a
project for rehabilitation and use of the former Exxon gasoline
station and the discussion that followed were lengthy and full
of minute details. One could see that all of the parties interested
— the restaurant-chain proprietor, the developer and the architect
— were very careful in preparing their argument. They well understood
that ANC could really bring any further work to a halt, so each
question was answered by the person best qualified. One could
witness as well that the ANC members and speakers from the floor
would express notions balanced, well-worded and to the matter.
There were naturally protective-oriented arguments in favor of
the project that would eliminate suspicions as to possible negative
effects, but there were as well positive-oriented arguments stressing
importance of adding life and bringing new jobs to the community.
It is of interest that the architect was careful to stress her
real involvement into preserving the local character — entrance
to a new restaurant is meant to preserve the entrance canopy for
the cars of the former gasoline station, for example. The residents
felt it important as well to save this particular land-mark of
the Thirties from oblivion.
When later I was discussing the type of contacts architects
and developers would have with ANC, with the Author of that small
rehabilitation project (she would not agree to call it small,
by the way, which once more has shown me the deep imprint of 'soviet'
grandeur on my own mentality), she revealed that the owner — earlier
operating in Maryland — would never expect so lengthy a procedure,
so that his plans had to take 6 to 9 months more than anticipated).
From various sources I've got confirmation that adding obstacles
to quick investment projects, the ANCs had practically brought
improvement to the urban environment and the urban economy as
well — far less badly-prepared projects have got a chance to be
implemented than 10 years earlier when the ANC system started
for good. Architects got used to it, although it is rather hard
with the old-timers in the job. In a way that strengthened the
local element in their activity and made competition from outside
more difficult, as a developer would rather seek for an architect's
office, strongly anchored to a particular part of the City, with
an established reputation there. Being aware of the interaction
duration, architects are careful to make a contract in that way,
that all the preliminary stages of research and design would be
paid monthly in proportion to time spent. In a way it looks like
restitution of a Medieval type relation between the community
and the architect and it is quite possible we soon will be able
to speak on Community-based architectural practice, being private
and at the same time responsible before ANC and the Citizens associations.
d. A discussion on the American University attempt to move its
Law School to an old building, while presenting falsified data
on the Parking. The problem is connected to inevitable negative
impact on Spring Valley Shopping Center parking, so a must to
make a second move after the Board of Zoning Adjustment has justified
the University action and the D.C. Court of Appeals has denied
the protest. Here a group of citizens is taking action while the
Commission is to approve that or rather to be aware of that.
e. An exchange of opinion on a typical dispute between neighbors
proved to be most interesting for various reasons. A new owner
of the house was eager to destroy a pool-house that was there
before, and to replace it with a new, bigger one. Everything went
smoothly enough, and the neighbors expressed no objections till
construction was started. Then the owner of a neighboring house
made a sudden move giving a paper to the ANC insisting that his
rights were violated as the far side of the pool was to be only
a foot from the dividing fence. The plaintiff was absent, so only
the architect and the owner were present, and the most interesting
was the fact that the architect insisted that the ANC would address
the City-Hall concerning necessity to clarify the regulations
as to the secondary buildings, because those in action have left
too much uncertainty in situations like that. (Precisely speaking,
two rules were used: one that spoke that a shed would not be appropriate
to be used as a bedroom, the other — that food could not be prepared
there. It is obvious that, technically one could sleep inside
under a pool-house roof and one could make food there as well,
so the pool, treated that way, could not be placed nearer than
six feet from the border, while treated as any other secondary
structure like a garage or a bunker for trash, it could be placed
that way).
Nothing could be decided with the plaintiff's absence yet the
very understanding attitude expressed by the ANC Commissioners,
speaking as home-owners to a home-owner is worth mention.
Concluding the impressions, one is to not some hints that far
more unites the Palisades with adjacent communities of Virginia,
that are physical continuation just on the other side of the Potomac,
than with centrally located neighborhoods of D.C. Be it in their
reach, the Palisadians would surely prefer that the D.C. border
was driven a little further to the East, leaving them in peace.
Case-study 2. ANC meeting. Dupont Circle. ANC 2B 01.
Scenery: a Methodist Church, second floor hall, with an interior
comfortable and well lit — at least 150 people could be sitting
there, some 70 people were present. The meeting started at 7.00
PM and lasted till 10.30 PM with no significant defection.
Population mixed, so there were about 30% Blacks present and
a diversity of attitudes was more obvious than in the Palisades.
It is apparent that only the better-to do were present — it would
be really strange to see at such a gathering somebody of those
who are paying with Food Coupons at the Columbia Road Store. It
is worth mentioning that for many years homosexuals have been
one of the moving forces for the neighborhood, of necessity to
secure their own rights giving it much of their time and effort.
a. First of all the Municipal Police Divisions 3 and 4 present
reports on the state of affairs in comparison with the previous
month — a visible decline is registered (it looks that situation
back in Moscow is far more dangerous): 1 homicide, no rapes, no
arson, mainly automobiles stolen. A lady from the audience speaks
about 2 suspects seen on the roof nearby (I have a confirmation
that's typical "Neighbors watch" activist attitude.
b. A question of the Francis Pool, the only facility of that
kind where payment has been just introduced a week before, causing
outburst of anger and dismay. It is outspoken that not the fact
itself is so enraging, and majority of those who are taking floor
stress that to pay $3 for adults and $1 for both children and
the aged ones is no problem for them personally. It seems that
the majority would take justification, that a bigger renovation
of the Pool has taken place, that's now the best facility in D.C.
for granted, if that question would be properly discussed with
the ANC.
That never happened, so a definite violation of Law — that was
question number one. It is important that both Mr. Lightfoot,
a Council member, who had previously worked at this very ANC and
now was responsible for Sports and Health facilities, and a deputy
Director for D.C. Department of Recreation and Parks, understood
that it was important to come to that meeting at their after hours.
The Deputy presented justification for the Head of the department
being unable to come because of a previously arranged Seminar
of a kind, but that did not meet much understanding from both
the ANC members and the audience. Both officials stressed that
introducing payment at one Pool only was considered a beginning
and that without that still more pools were to be closed because
of their desperate technical and sanitary state.
Both officials stressed their fault of not reporting to the
ANC but both tried to present it as a mistake — a stand severely
opposed by the ANC that stressed the violation of Law that would
make decision unlawful. The Councillor tried to divert attention
and to "buy out" the Audience that with payments activated,
the residents could hope that the Pool would be open later than
the Independence Day in September. That did not received applause
at all. People from the floor stressed various aspects: that the
Pool did not present all the services that would in part justify
additional payment because of being understaffed; that this was
the only place where racial desegregation was an important asset
and that the first weekend after introducing the payment the place
proved to be too calm with diminished number of black children
there; that renovation of Francis Pool was initiated by the ANC
and a lot of effort was there; that nobody asked the community
to build such an expensive renovation program, and that the ticket-booth
was interpreted officially as a place to pay for special training
courses and not for using the pool itself; that though, by Law,
i.e. in theory the poor could not be forbidden to use the Pool
because of lack of money, practically they would be thrown out.
A young man from the floor witnessed that he tried that on that
very legal basis and that he was refused entrance. Another former
ANC member who turned a Councillor, Jack Evans, stressed that
up to 80% of the Department of Recreation and Parks were being
spent on salaries, so their cuts should be sought instead of seeking
for several thousands dollars through selling access cards and
tickets etc. One could see that the election debate has started
full swing, though the matter was not mentioned at all.
As far as I could get that properly, the ANC unanimously voted
for continuation of the campaign against introducing the payment,
but decided not to initiate legal action being too expensive and
too time-consuming, while the result was dubious.
c. A very interesting discussion was going on for about 40 minutes
on a question of organizing a bakery at the ground-floor of a
building just at the Dupont Circle. As it was in the Palisades,
the owner, the developer and the architect were all present.
Nobody among those taking floor severely opposed introducing
new business and new work-places. All of the questions were technically
correct and touched the issue of a danger that still another food
enterprise would worsen the sanitary situation in a narrow alley
between the building in question and the one that is facing the
Circle. A lady who owns a bigger building with apartments for
rent said that she has been already paying $10 an hour for additional
sweeping the side-walk, as people coming from the let-out restaurants
would throw paper on the pavement. She stressed that rats were
a nuisance already and that might be still worse, so a lot of
technical questions were dedicated to the issue of how, who and
when will take the garbage out, at what hours the bakery would
be open etc. The owner was promising in so many words all kind
of accuracy — that was rather sourly received (too many experience
proved that the results would not necessarily meet the promises),
so he used the last argument, inviting everybody who was undecided
to pay a visit to the same type of institution operating in Alexandria.
Nobody insisted, so the necessary approval was given.
d. I've found the next discussion centered on a project for
using the underground space below the Dupont Circle still more
interesting. An architect was present all right, yet his role
was restricted to showing illustrative drawings in time, while
the developer has taken command for good. He was excellent in
careful wording as well as in his ability to propose what might
be considered alternative solutions for the ANC judgement. Nobody
could question obvious benefit to improve safety and aesthetics
at the Dupont Circle, especially that a Health Center is to take
half of the underground space. So, technically speaking that hearing
was more ritual than anything else — the project was already preliminary
approved by the ANC 6 months before, it was approved by the Zoning
Adjustment Board with a stipulation that the ANC should give judgement
as to two smaller questions. One was the locating of a guard's
kiosk (Moscow type as was said!) in the middle of a new orderly
space to be seen by everybody or at one side of that space with
less exposure. The other question was of stylistic similarity
of canopies over the entrances.
Opinions, as predictable, were immediately divided as to the
kiosk, which in the end has left the developer with freedom to
choose. Yet, rather unexpectedly for me, a lot was said about
the design of the canopies (that really looked rather heavy, though
the developer deliberated long on their 'lightness'). An elderly
gentleman took the floor to stress how important that would be
if the architect looked carefully around the square to seek for
stylistic analogue. Another one gave professional opinion on the
signing over the canopy. And still another was accurate enough
to pay attention of the audience on the importance of material
and the finish for such a project in such a place.
When it was clear that the project has been already approved
and the time-table would leave so little time, that any change
was practically excluded, and the developer in nice words told
that he would like but he would not be able to make everybody
happy, a necessity to 'save face' was hanging in the air. So,
a nice decision was taken, that though the project was approved,
the developer and the architect were obliged to present additional
information on design and finish. I doubt it much that this decision
will be practical, or, rather one of the Councilors will have
a look at the drawings and the samples, and yet the very fact
is of major importance: the feeling of belonging to the Place
and of personal responsibility for its human value is present
with the active minority of the neighborhood without doubt. And
that feeling could and would be verbalized with high degree of
clarity.
e. It was several times stressed that a cooperation between
the Municipal Police and the Park Police has been good, and I've
got a chance to see that the Secret Police which is mostly engaged
with safety of the Embassies, takes trouble to intrude as well
— I was a witness to a careful search through a Hippy-looking
young man's belongings at the Church back wall made by the Secret
Service. After a short discussion the young man was left in peace.
Case-study 3. The Reed-Cooke preparatory meeting, Adams Morgan.
Scenery: a small canteen attached to a poor Methodic Church.
Just a block off 18th Street, at an intersection of Kalorama and
Ontario roads. Poor, mainly Black people are present (a look around
the other day reveals that though poor, the neighborhood is rather
dignified: majority of buildings have been painted this year,
there are small flower-beds and not too many signs of abandonment
and vandalism could be traced. The canteen has no air-conditioning
and four fans are rotating with noise under the ceiling. Cockroaches
are everywhere, and that place looks exactly like small canteens
in the worst among far-off company-towns in Russia. Those attending
the meeting (not too many of them, just around 20), both Black
and White, look dignified and speak understandable American English.
The meeting had to start at 7.30 PM, yet everybody was late,
the ANC Chairman included, so they seem to be less aware of time
pressure than in the places I was before. It started at 8.00 PM
with a report from the District 3 Municipal Police — it's worth
noting that both the Captain and the Sergeant were waiting without
any sign of haste or irritation. One could feel that warm relation
does exist between the community and the officers who were later
seen off with applause from the audience.
Only two items are on the agenda of the meeting.
The first one was connected with reporting and discussing the
running campaign against what they called "the Kelly Garage"
after the Mayor-in office name.
That is a typical collision of traditional bureaucratic rationale
and the local understanding. The City Hall expressed a wish to
build a multistory garage and enforced the decision on every other
level. The ANC is expressing feelings of the majority of residents
(or it has helped these feelings to be created) that the Garage
will lead to further deterioration of the neighborhood without
much contribution to its economy. To strengthen its pressure on
the Mayor, the ANC has used a popular technique: a post-card was
printed bearing a color image of Washington National Cathedral
with the following text on its back side:
"Dear Mayor Kelly: Don't destroy our neighborhood!
Here is what Adams Morgan needs:
A shuttle to Metro stations, extended weekend Metro hours, wider
18th Street pedestrian and business-friendly sidewalks, bile lanes,
less exhaust fumes, 50% of parking preserved for residents 24
hours a day, and a comprehensive transportation plan that will
serve the long term interests of both residents and businesses
in Adams-Morgan.
Here is what Adams-Morgan DOES NOT need:
A massive, city funded parking garage that will bring even more
cars and pollution into residential side streets and degrade the
air, safety and quality of life of our children, adults and neighborhood
oriented small businesses. Spend $12 million on something better!".
Being already paid for, the card is easy to be sent to the Mayor's
office with a petitioner's signature and address.
It is obvious that the text for that card was written by a person
who has more to say yet chooses the simplest possible form of
explanation, understandable for anybody who can read.
Still simpler leaflet was xerocopied in numbers to be seen at
any exposed surface assigned for that purpose. The simplest possible
graphic image of a garage building encircled by a ribbon with
lettering: STOP THE KELLY GARAGE/SAVE ADAMS-MORGAN and crossed
by a black stripe to remind a 'no transit' road-sign. To strengthen
that picture additionally, another inscription has been added:
this neighborhood opposes the Kelly Garage.
The second half of the meeting was in full dedicated to a dispute
between candidates for the City Council membership (Democratic
Primaries planned to take place in September this year). Two candidates
out of eight were present at this preliminary meeting (as well
as a Black lady whom I've met at every meeting before — she was
busy distributing leaflets trying hard to build support for her
re-election to the Senate). Discussion proved to be purely technical
and in the end a small preparatory committee has been formed of
three volunteers.
I've used this meeting to speak longer with Police officers
trying to know their opinion on cooperation with neighborhoods.
If they were sincere, it seams that they really appreciate establishing
good attitude and support on the residents' part, that they get
some important information free and that they are happy to be
in contact with ANC that would distribute information around,
like it was with a Police leaflet informing that:
"The Third District has established an anti-violence initiative
which focuses on the removal of illegal firearms at the street
level. The primary goal of this program is to reduce the level
of gun related violence in our community. To assist in achieving
this goal, we have established a CONFIDENTIAL "HOT-LINE"
at which members of the community may report persons in possession
of firearms. You are not required to give any information about
yourself. We only need to know WHO is carrying the gun, WHERE
they can be located, and a brief rescription of WHAT they are
wearing at the time of call.
LET'S WORK TOGETHER FOR A SAFER COMMUNITY."
Then the Office telephone and confidential hot-line telephone
and an addition in brackets: we pay for information leading to
the recovery of guns.
One can not avoid certain comparison: people in Russia still
have preserved long-possessed hostility towards the Government
as a whole and to any governmental agency in particular, with
special degree of suspicion toward Police. The fact that there
was no Municipal Police lest only local departments of Federal
Police and so Police never was responsible before the community
or responsive to its interests is of utter importance as well.
Attempts have been made to change this attitude, several times
a high reward was offered for valuable information concerning
homicide and racket, a parallel Municipal Police has been established
in Moscow, and yet it would be practically impossible to imagine
that people in Moscow would address Police as THEIR Police. An
attitude is different: Police is not to be entrusted.
Naturally enough, when a Police sergeant repeats the words he
has been drilled to remember by heart, that the Police task is
to provide better services for the community, it is no more than
a rehearsal. And yet even that mechanical repetition is of intense
value — police work is really understood as a public service.
That attitude can not be changed either by countless films with
corrupted cops every second step, or by newspapers that have been
constantly feeding the public with stories about corrupted cops.
All that still is perceived as exceptional while the local cop
as a help to the community is taken seriously enough.
It is obvious that neither the Police officers nor the ANC members
never have mentioned to me the small riots of 1990, started with
a quarrel between Blacks and Latinos, and of big riots that had
taken place nearby in the Sixties, with National Guard interfering
etc. That events, sad as they were, had caused a major change
in attitude of the Government to the neighborhoods along U-Street,
so partial rehabilitation, building a Community Center and opening
a subway station are to be considered a kind of answer to situation
that was definitely overstrained for two decades.
Case-study 4. Ward One Democrats Candidates' Debate. July
19.
Scenery: The Marie Reed Learning Center, relatively new modern
style school-building at 18th and California Streets. Spacious
playground at the front, as formal and pathetically unfit for
children as any other facility of that kind in Russia. Predominance
of the Blacks (or Afro-Americans as they are officially called
now) is visible everywhere, be it a basket-ball pith outside,
children pictures hanging in the halls, advertisements in the
lobby, and the big amphitheater itself.
The average would be 3/1 and that same proportion was true for
the candidates: of the seven there were only 2 White people among
them. It is interesting that there was a significant number of
Viets within the audience (there were some leaflets in the Vietnamese
language on the tables in the lobby), though no one of them has
yet been ambitious enough to risk running for candidacy.
In a way it is a little strange that local elections should
copy the bigger ones, being organized to a Party pattern — after
all, these are the problems of everyday existence for the big
City and those problems have not much to do with being Democrat
or Republican way voting residents (in my own Consultant work
in Moscow I've tried hard to avoid the Party factor in the City
policies at the basic level). It looks like a habit and in part
a resulting effect of using the same pattern and the same activists
to work for any election campaign. So, the debate I was witnessing,
was a try-out before the Democrat Primaries in September that
are to result in having a single Ward 1 Democrat Candidate for
the City Council.
One thing was evident for sure — each of the Candidates (even
Dorothy Brizill who was known to support the Garage) was wearing
a "No to Kelly Garage" label, so the pressure from Adams
Morgan was taken seriously enough and none of the Seven would
even think of opposing the mainstream attitude, turning inevitably
a stand for future policies whoever would win.
A number of Candidates had their support-groups seated in the
hall ready to applause at moments prearranged, so, to a degree
it was a kind of cartoonist's image of the American electorial
campaign seen from within. Being impressed by TV short-cuts of
the Senate or the House of representatives debate at my Moscow
TV screen, I was rather surprised to discover that the majority
of the candidates, an active Councilmember not an exception, can
not speak clear, and both the wording itself and the pronunciation
were rather poor. As it should be wherever seven people would
try to persuade the same audience of their abilities to solve
the local problems, they were doomed to reshuffle the same items
several times. And yet two hours of beating around the bush were
not spent for nothing and some hints as to the inner conflicts
behind the screen seem to be clarified.
Who the candidates are?
Careful examination of leaflets together with impressions from
the debate and tape-records give some understanding.
Dorothy Brizill, a Black lady in her late forties, with
two Masters degrees from Columbia University and 12 years of experience
in political issues. It seems that after her upstart with the
Carter Administration (special assistant to Warren Christopher)
her political career had swayed and she is full of energy to start
anew at the D.C. Council scene.
She is campaigning in most aggressive way, being the only one
to attack the Ward One representative, Frank Smith, directly accusing
him in many words of little efficiency if not laziness in promoting
Ward One cause. Her campaign is typical for those type of populist
aggression that is never constructive in any way:
"Protest marches can't close down street corner drug sales
and street prostitution. As your councilmember, I'll see to it
that all Departments and Agencies in city government work together
with the police to shut down the open-air drug and prostitution
markets in our Ward.
"Everybody agrees that Adams-Morgan has a parking problem.
Why has it taken over a decade to begin to do anything about it?
When I am your Councilmember I won't allow problems in the Ward
to remain unaddressed for so long that they divide our community.
"Construction of the next segment of the METRO Green Line
is now underway in Ward One. Metro must not tear up our neighborhoods
again like it did in Shaw and on U Street. This time must be different,
and I'll make sure it is.." And so on and so forth.
Zhirinowsky-like attitude that meets with much approval because
offers easy answers to any problem and so, no wonder that Dorothy
Brizill has got a profound number of devoted supporters among
both Black, blue collar White and Hispanic communities. The manner
of her self-advertising is assured and it has got a nice to everybody
touch:
"I'll work hard against crime and drugs. I won't just talk
and I won't just march. I'll work hard to make sure that the criminals
who make our streets unsafe and our citizens afraid are arrested
and punished-not just sent straight back to our neighborhoods
after they are arrested.
"I'll keep Ward One first...
"I'll be there when you need help. Nothing a Councilmember
does-nothing-is more important than providing services to the
citizens in the Ward.
"I'll work for you. When you need help with the city's
bureaucracy, you need a Councilmember who'll work for you, who
isn't afraid to take on powerful interests on your behalf.
"I'll talk strait to you. You'll always know where I stand.
I won't waffle; I won't waiver; and I won't say one thing on the
east side of the Ward and something else on the west side.
"I'll listen to you. Your opinions, your concerns, are
important. All public servants, including your Councilmember,
should listen to you". And so on.
Ken Fealing — a Black man about 35. Nothing has been
said about his education, so it seems it's only a high-school.
Fealing once held the Commissioner position and still is rather
active, though his manner of speaking does not reveal any special
talent. His points for a program look like Safety first, better
education second, yet Fealing tries to stress all the problems
with certain elements of constructive attitude, although one would
wonder where from money could be gathered to insert, for instance,
"Fully implement Community Empowerment Policing in every
Ward One community" by means of establishing police mini-stations
in every neighborhood as well as bi subsidized housing complexes.
Keeping Ward One schools open after hours, developing peer-pressure
and conflict resolution programs-to be created and directed by
youth, make parents' greater control of schools (by the way there
are hints as to tension growing out of so-called Afro-American
programs, sometimes coming near to more than excess in stating
that not Clinton but Mandela is to be considered "their President")
make to another point with Fealing's ideas and again the financial
support looks more than vague.
Fealing's more elaborate program might be seen in his statements
on quality of life. "Creating tax incentives for home improvements
and for home-based businesses that hire neighborhood residents"
or "strengthening linkage between commercial development
and the building and rehabilitation of low-income and affordable
housing", or "implementing cooperative conversion of
apartment buildings" sound quite reasonable. Understanding
of the link between economy and quality of life is obvious in
Fealing's program and his concept of "Roll back District
of Columbia sales taxes for a year for small businesses that improve
their store fronts" would be reasonable enough were it not
that the D.C. Budget is cut down again and again. Last but not
least, Fealing was the only one who would look forward to securing
each ANC with computer access to informational network on city
resources.
Although Ken Fealing's program is more than idealistic whether
the money factor was taken seriously, it is far more serious and
realistic than what Dorothy Brizill is playing with, and yet Ken's
poor eloquence and lack of a leader's charisma are evident, so,
he has no chance. (By the way, Fealing's leaflet proved to be
the one that bears a Hispanic slogan "Fealin para el Futuro"
on top of the English text).
Four candidates could be omitted without any loss, because two
of them could not produce any program that would sound personalized
to any considerable degree. One is an old-timer, a Black man
in his late Sixties and he would do nothing more than to stress
his being successful Councilmember years ago. Another one, a White
young man with low voice and uncertain features would mainly claim
that his leaflets were torn off be the Brezill supporting team
(there was no leaflets of his on the table in the lobby). And
the third one is Frank Smith, a Black actual Councilmember, severely
criticized by his opponents, without loosing neither self-control,
nor self-assurance. His supporting group was the biggest one at
the meeting and though he could not present a balanced program
and was just trying to have a good show of his merits, it looks
like he is doing his campaign pretty good. That leaves us with
one more candidate who deserves special attention.
Robin Stallings, a White businessman, before 30, well
educated, a little stiff and uneasy with an audience that does
not embrace too many people whose attention he might would have
easily won. I am still to know why that person is trying to get
elected to the City Council having small chance to win Democrat
Primaries.
More money were evidently spent for the start of Stalling's
campaign than it was with other candidates and his leaflets are
written better, being both aggressive and clear in stating things.
"Robin Stallings is the candidate for City Council from
Ward One who offers DC voters the opportunity to choose a new
generation of effective, aggressive, creative leadership ...
"Robin Stallings has demonstrated time and again his ability
to get things done — whether as an involved resident and community
organizer, an innovative small businessman and entrepreneur with
community spirit and vision, as environmental activist, or as
a successful international consultant — not only to make his ideas
heard, but to make them happen..." etc.
It is of interest that Stallings is the only one who can produce
visible proof to his own efforts — this is a corner of Champlain
and Euclid Streets, in the very heart of Adams Morgan. Seven years
ago there was an abandoned gas station and a run down apartment
building. Stallings founded the City Bikes bicycle shop to replace
the gas station. The shop was sponsoring fund-raisers for various
programs and Stallings had managed to pool money from local residents
to buy and renovate an adjacent run down building and managed
to make Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream to open their first DC store
there. With their support of the neighborhood, the corner was
changed enough to bear a known landmark in Adams Morgan: a nice
mural with three cows eating ice cream and riding a bike. Stallings
managed to fight back and to save the mural when it was threatened
by D.C. inspector — that made to a precedent that helped to save
that type of murals throughout the City. This is a fact that work
that was done at the corner provided a dozen of jobs to local
residents.
Robin Stallings with his good academic training and vision was
the key figure among the founding board members of the Institute
of Transportation and Development Policy to promote non-motorized
transportation in developing countries, and he took part in a
bigger project, that sent thousands of recycled bikes, carts and
wheelchairs to Africa and Central America, by means of that project
he acquired certain public and businesslike reputation with various
International organizations. It is evident that all of that activity
was good for his baby-business. His activity was rewarded and
in 1993 he was honored by the DC Metropolitan Police Department
for his "Dedicated Service and Contribution" on implementing
"police officers on-bike" project.
Robin Stallings has made it clear that his business starting
with bikes has brought him to better understanding of the bulk
of transportation problems, so he was ready to present a comprehensive
transportation plan for Ward One and the City. That neatly linked
his campaign with "No to Kelly Garage" movement. Stallings
was the one among speakers who insisted that all the problems,
be it crime, education or rehabilitation, being dependent on financing,
should be considered as secondary to encouraging local economy
and creating new jobs.
Stallings' leaflet has a nice ending: "As a ten years resident,
homeowner and small businessman in Ward One, Robin Stallings is
calling on others — residents and business persons alike — for
their support and their votes in the September 13 Democratic Primary".
And still I was sure that Stallings had no chance to be elected
— he is White, young and successful — enough to be beaten by a
Black angered person with strong populist touch and no need to
prove anything. Stalling's campaign seems to be an "overkill",
and the fact that he offered a special brochure "Towards
a sustainable transportation plan for Ward One" did not strengthen
his position at all. Perhaps, that has weakened it, as the majority
of those present at the debate had started to make allusions as
to his personal financial interest in introducing that plan, than
on the plan itself.
Stallings had stressed the impact of visitors' traffic on the
existing parking capacity of the Ward One residents and, in contrast
to tradition, made it visible that only a kind of public transportation,
like a neighborhood trolley line from Metro station U Street-Cardozo
to Woodley Park Metro, might be considered a radical solution.
This concept, as well as a detail proposal for restructuring usage
of 18th Street and analysis of the flaws for the "Kelly Garage"
project, are too good defined. They aim at an intelligent person,
ready to compare factual data. I felt positive that competing
candidates would do their best to ignore or to dismiss what Stallings
was to offer, or, still more effective, to steal his argument
— I was a witness to that already, when one of the candidates,
who was to be heard earlier because of the alphabetical order
of presenting his views and opinions, had just snatched two or
three points from Stalling's leaflet in order to pronounce that
first and thus making Stallings to look secondary.
I discovered in a couple of days that Stallings as well as Morgan
and Mosley were technically ruled out of the run: Gary Imhoff,
Brizill's husband and campaign manager, was successful in challenging
their lists of supporters (not all of those who signed, being
sure they were registered Democrats, bothered to make the annual
registration in time and properly), including his own (!) signature
under their petitions.
Some of the people present were taken aback by the violence
of rethorical exchange among the candidates, so Rob Hodgson, a
Sheridan-Kalorama resident said "I guess we, Ward 1 Democrats
read Tip O'Neill's book wrong (referring to "All politics
Is Local") — I guess we thought it was 'all politics is vocal'".
Hospitality, like good manners, was in short supply that evening.
When Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly appeared mid-forum (a brave gesture),
leading a throng of her Ward 1 supporters, a chorus of boos greeted
her. One man rushed to the well of the Roman-like auditorium to
plead frantically, "Don't let her speak! She's no Ward 1."
There was more theater-like effects that evening. Robert Clifton
who had been excluded from the debate after withdrawing from the
Democratic primary to run as an independent candidate, rushed
down to present Brizill a blowup of an ANC check for $1,000, dated
1991, a research grant to an organization Brizill headed. Clifton
claimed that although Brizill accepted the money, she never submitted
reports showing she had done the work. Brizill answered that she
had given written reports to the ANC, but the ANC, apparently
because of frequent turnover, lost these reports etc.
Case-study 5: Stephen Koczak, President, Federation of Citizens
Associations of the District of Columbia.
The man seemed rather suspicious, perhaps due to his former
diplomatic activity with the State Department, so I'd managed
to make an appointment for an interview after 3 successive telephone
conversations. The last one proved to be satisfactory, as Stephen
Koczak started to utter accusations addressed to all kind of politicians
in D.C. giving certain parallel to what his personal understanding
of problems in Moscow was.
He stressed that the whole of Home Rule system with its Mayor,
its City Council, its ANCs and citizens associations have proved
to be a complete failure. He was sure that the previous system
where the 3 Commissioners used to be in direct contact with the
citizens associations was in fact far more democratic and served
better because control on executive decisions was short-term,
simple and evident. He expressed his opinion that private law
firms who are representing the developers' interest, actually
do rule the City. He also expressed his belief that the Gay minority
and especially 17 Gay Bars, relatively closed for Police inspection
without notice, serve important role for large-scale drugs traffic,
and that money acquired that way are used to support those in
the City Council who would secure the donors' interest. He also
stressed that not everything should be discussed over the telephone.
Case-study 7: John Ray and his campaign to run the Mayor's
office.
At first there were modest slogans in the Northeast part of
Washington D.C.: "John Ray for the Mayor". Then there
were glimpses at Ray's taking floor at the City Council discussions
on running affairs at TV Channel 13, exclusively occupied by the
Council. Then I've read Ray's leaflets at any meeting I've attended,
then again some articles in "The Washington Post" and
finally I've attended to two of his meetings with voters. One
was a brief "vote for me" intrusion, all smiles, to
an ANC meeting, yet the second one was more interesting, because
here Ray marched in a night club at Tacoma Station to sit there
with younger people, answering all kind of questions, some being
not too pleasant.
(I try to imagine someone in Moscow making attempt to beat Louszkov
at the next election, who would think of working that way and
I can not: bigger meetings, yes, TV discussions, yes, but never
at the street level or in the communities. Louszkov, being Mayor,
has been careful to play the publicity game with full use of his
possibilities — opening this and opening that around the new developments,
or angrily attacking "municipal bureaucrats" for neglecting
the city Center. Whether somebody would risk competing with him
in earnest, is a big question.)
The drama of John Ray is that, him being a member of the City
Council for 16 years, he can not successfully prove his claim
for a number of good decisions of that collective body. He can
just state that it has been his personal success to pass the law
prohibiting the conversion of rental housing to condominiums unless
a majority of tenants want it, or 1991 legislation to exempt senior
citizens from capital improvement rent increases. Things he might
prove his Authorship to, like creating the Tenants Assistance
Program, providing government subsidies to help low- and moderate-income
tenants to pay their rent, or the Distressed Properties Program
to renovate run-down apartment buildings for the tenants who live
there now, are not spectacular. Him losing campaign for being
the Mayor thrice at a row, kills enthusiasm with some of those
people who were supporting him before.
So, it was most interesting to observe just how this Black gentleman,
a good-looking lawyer, born and grown up dirt-poor in rural Georgia,
who made his way through joining Air-Force, later to enter a Law
school, was trying hard to look more emotional, more charismatic
than he really is, fighting that stiff-suited image, his opponents
successfully used to beat him before. It is hard for Ray to run
ahead of Mrs. Pratt Kelly, the actual Mayor, and Mr. Barry, the
former Mayor, and yet he desperately continues his fight, it being
his last chance. I can but quote Thorn Pozen who was managing
Roy's campaign in upper Washington Northwest Ward Three: "Both
Kelly and Barry light up a room when they walk in. But we've learnt
the hard way that charisma doesn't balance the books or fight
crime". That argument may perhaps be appraised by some middle-class
Black neighborhoods and a number of White neighborhoods in that
part of D.C. that is located to the west of Rock Creek Park, but
I doubt it much it has bigger chance with that very Black and
poor majority, Ray needs to win the elections.
(Some additional information acquired later with the help of
Robin Stallings might alter the picture drawn. As previous Primaries
have shown, with three leading candidates and several secondary
ones, to win means to get something slightly over 30% of those
who would bother to vote. So, the final result might be unpredictable
— Mayor Kelly had but 8% of supporters as shown through the Polls
three weeks before the elections, then a strong Newspaper support
and victory followed with a fraction of votes to her advantage).
Case-study 8: The Georgetown Citizens Association.
Georgetown being the oldest place in D.C. area, where every
successive wave of immigrants had marked its road to social advance
and where still former Black inhabitants would come on Sundays
to the church (one of Black ministers is a Deputy President for
the Association) is relatively expensive, be it the real estate
value or the prices, and its Day population far exceeds its stable
population, as it's typical for any tourist place.
The Association is the oldest civic organization in D.C. being
a merger of two associations established in 1878 and in 1920's,
aimed at preserving and improving the quality of life in the community.
The number of members is rather high — more than 900, i.e. about
10% of population. Reading the Annual Report circulation letter,
one may discover that in 1993 the Association:
- established more than 60 neighborhood watches throughout Georgetown,
- provided a mechanism for residents to hire a security guard,
- surveyed street lighting in residential areas and campaigned
to upgrade the system,
- mounted a campaign for residents to turn on their front lights,
- successfully prosecuted a protest against Annastasia that resulted
in revocation of the nightclub's liquor license,
- worked with other sectors of the community to pass a comprehensive
parking plan.
There 15 committees, dealing with:
- Alcohol Beverage Control,
- Airports and Utilities,
- Business Community Improvement,
- Canine "Scoop",
- Crime and Public Safety,
- Environment,
- Historic Preservation,
- Membership,
- Neighborhood Watch,
- Newsletter,
- Streets and Sidewalks,
- Taxation,
- Traffic and Parking,
- Trees,
- Zoning and Building Regulations.
It is obvious that the Committees were established through years,
partly their number being a result of the merge of 1920's as their
fields of activity are definitely overlapping. When comparing
this list with the list of priorities for 1994, it is possible
to see how difficult it is to cover the new goals with the Committees
stable system:
- historic preservation (ibid.),
- illegal signage,
- lack of recreational facilities and parks (ibid. yet with a
new accent),
- litter an canine "scoop" regulations (new accent),
- noise,
- number of bars/taverns in the area,
- parking (ibid.),
- personal safety (new accent),
- planting of trees (ibid.),
- police presence (new accent),
- security,
- street lighting,
- streets and sidewalks (ibid.),
- taxation (ibid.).
The Association is careful to publish a nice looking monthly
report on every Membership meeting, to preserve Style in outlay
and quality of printing. So, looking through several successive
issues one may know more.
The report is titled "Georgetown Citizens".
March, 1994: a Police report, stating the same decline
of crime as in other police districts of D.C.: 7% reduction in
1992 compared with 1991, 13% reduction in crimes against persons
with but a tiny reduction of .3% in crimes against property. Police
was stressing the importance of the Neighborhood Watches for that
reduction yet it is hard to guess, how sincere the officers are,
taking to consideration the Police element in general politics.
There is still a controversial question of a Metro stop in Georgetown
— so the CAG had to stress that it never did oppose a Metro stop,
though the Washington Post article published a month before wrote
that Georgetown was not included when Metro was planned 25 years
ago, because of opposition from residents "who feared that
a subway line would bring more people and crime to the area".
The real reason seems to be the price of tunneling through solid
rock south of M Street.
The group is backing the project to establish a "Potomac
Heritage" Museum and Visitor Center at the abandoned Georgetown
Incinerator Site at 31 and K sts. The group is operating out of
offices of the Georgetown Heritage Trust.
The Hospital for Sick Children presents its annual Flower and
Garden Show.
Visiting some of Georgetown's handsomest houses is sponsored
by St. John's Episcopal Church ($20 per person per day!). A Garden
Tour as well — things for the benefit of G. Children's House and
the like.
There is a kind of analytical article on renovated Coffee Houses
and the new ones as well as the latest news around Georgetown
shops etc. closures or openings.
There is a very interesting short report worth citing here:
PEPCO No Longer Places Meters on G'Town Houses:
...PEPCO began placing meters outside dwellings in 1980's. The
Citizens Association received complaints of premises being defaced
by the meters and called upon PEPCO to discontinue this practice,
stressing that it degraded the distinctive appearance of houses
in Georgetown and that it detracted from the areas historic ambience.
PEPCO has since cooperated and no longer sites meters in external
locations.
Eventually, PEPCO plans to adopt remote reading of meters, a
procedure now employed by the Washington Gas Company, obviating
personal inspecting of meters...
There are small advertisements taking one full page of the six
and, most interesting, there is a small note of big significance:
"Georgetown University Outreach.
Earlier in the meeting, James Donahue, Dean of Students at Georgetown
University, announced that the University was creating a new position,
Assistant to the President for Community Relations, who will serve
as liaison to community groups...He noted that CAG President Shorey
has agreed to serve on the University's selection committee for
the position."
That last issue is of interest as relations between the community
and the University have been strained for years. The biggest concern
of residents is linked with the University actually going out
of its territory: a lot of homeowners have found that renting
apartments to students is a profitable business. Herefrom a number
of violations connected with overcrowding apartments, shared by
a number of students, fire regulations being broken, especially
in cellars and attics, poor maintenance, trash etc. In a way that's
repetition of the eternal dispute between the Universities and
the towns starting in the Middle Ages and continued to this day
in those rare cases, when Universities continue to be encircled
by housing and town cervices.
April, 1994: Efforts to revitalize the Georgetown Arts
Commission in order to regain reputation as Washington premier
arts community.
A report on March meeting, that included Volunteer Leaders,
speakers for the Jelleff Boys & Girls Club (4 acres since
1952, 400-plus members, 100 Georgetowners, team sports, arts and
crafts program); for Meals on Wheels (delivering meals to people
who can not get around "allowing many people who would otherwise
be in nursing homes to keep their dignity without being 'warehoused'",
most clients pay $24 a week, some are charity, one driver, one
'jumper'), for Georgetown Ministry Center (15 to 20 people in
dialogue with sandwiches, provides shelter for homeless in various
participating churches), for the Georgetown Senior Center (home-cooked
meals three days per week at St.John's Church, excursions and
outgoings for lonely elderly people).
A report on "Scoop Your Pet's Poop" signs, 125 of
which were put up throughout Georgetown (only one resident on
N Street has objected to a sign near his property — Weaver's Hardware
on Wisconsin Ave. donated necessary nuts and bolts).
The Police has agreed to make a monthly report on crimes on
a block by block basis.
Mt.Zion Methodist Church (Black) has been recognized for its
efforts to "preserve and catalogue" records documenting
the church's history — the Humanities Council has made a grant
of $8000 to the project, the Historical Society of Washington
has given the church its Rencard Prize for Historic Preservation.
They are publishing full list of 162 new members!
Information on "shaping up" facilities in G'Town.
Correcting the record on Metro subject — John Gill: "It
is true that it would have been very difficult tunnelling under
M St. and Wisconsin Ave. But it is also true that the Georgetown
Citizens Ass'n voted against Metro because we feared the subway
would bring crime onto the area. Still further, there was a fear
that the tunnelling might harm the old buildings. I know this
because I was chairman of the Transportation and Parking Committees
of the Association.."
"Let's Clean Up on May 7".
"Friends of Montrose Clean Up Parks"
Some 90 good citizens have been quietly working behind the scenes
to help restore two parks familiar to generations of parents,
small children, of owners, tennis players and walkers. As "Friends
of Montrose Park" founded two years ago by Scott Bush of
Q St., they are contributing time and money to rescue both Montrose
and Dumbarton Oaks parks from "years of neglect" — cleaning
out the boxwood gardens, adding new benches, installing new tennis
nets, repainting the gazebo, and this year redoing the rose garden
initially planted in 1956 by the Georgetown Garden Club.
This year a major cleanup of Dumbarton Oaks Park (behind Montrose
in Rock Creek Park) is underway as well, with a number of landscape
firms donating their services along with those of volunteers.
Bush notes that these naturalistic Italianate gardens — designed
by Beatriz Farrand for the Bliss family — "have not been
touched in 40 years" although they are a landmark in landscape
architecture.
Asked how "Friends" began, founder and first president
Bush says he frequented park with child and dog and noticed the
neglect. "Here was an opportunity for users of the park to
give something back", he says (names, telephone numbers for
contact).
A nice little note among the news: "Although apparently
no date's been set for his marriage to Noel Soderberg, rumor has
it that Jack Evans is buying a house on 32nd St. We'll be delighted
to welcome our Ward 2 City Council member — and his bride — to
Georgetown".
"We heard at the last meeting that there are some people
putting counterfeit "Visitor Parking" cards on their
autos. Residents report that some counterfeits are on xerox paper.
whereas authentic ones are on card stock. Although the question
is "Can't these ubiquitous uniformed ticket-givers tell the
counterfeits from the real?" the answer is "Apparently
not" Don Shannon brought this matter to our attention, noting
that parking is worth some $50 a week in Georgetown and that in
Alexandria, visitor parking cards are written in disappearing
ink so that they cannot be used ad infinitum. Police Capt. Malkin
said that parking enforcement is in the Dept. of Public Works,
so apparently that office — not the police — is the one to call
if you spot phoney cards on your street."
{I've quoted the whole note to underline how difficult it would
be to get to such feeling of a threat to the community by personal
dishonesty of unknown people, there in Russia. The old anti-police
attitude would still make it rare that people would think about
informing the police, and the police is absolutely not prepared
for the actions needed, so the vicious circle is difficult to
break.}
A page dedicated to variety of flowers and bushes recommended
for planting in Georgetown by an expert would complete the picture.
May, 1994: A report on the arts state in G'Town has included
noting the demise of some book shops, panelist Marcia Carter urged
Georgetowners to patronize local book shops.
President's letter: "Using the neighborhood watches as
the organizational base, we have formed six security guard units,
with one more in formation, covering a large part of Georgetown.
Each unit has approximately 100 participants, which shows that
about 700 people were recruited — a massive undertaking.
"As I forecast in my last letter, the newsletter received
an award from the D.C. Federation of Citizens Associations as
the "Outstanding Association Newsletter".
That's important to note personal qualifications of the new
officers: former staff attorney on Capitol Hill, a retired lawyer;
attorney in private practice; Pastor of Zion Methodist Church;
former Capitol Hill staffer, volunteer with Hospital for Sick
Children and Children's Museum; on board of Washington Studio
school, longtime volunteer in D.C. arts organizations; former
general counsel at Dept. of Agriculture, attorney.
Initiative with a reprimand to CAG because of its omitting the
Waterfront... an answer describing thirty years of effort to rescue
the Waterfront on the remaining land which is 'temporarily' occupied
by a commercial parking lot and a Dept. of Public Works construction
yard (D.C. holds title to this land by virtue of transfer from
the federal Dept. of Transportation, and the land can only be
used for highway construction or a park.
Panelist Max Berry, fonder of Georgetown Waterfront Arts Commission:
"We should have something in a class with Via Veneto or Champs
Elysees". Hopes to bring to Georgetown a Victorian bandstand
(now in storage) for concerts on the waterfront.
"Georgetowners who love near Volta Park are sparking a
community effort to revitalize the park..They have already raised
some $2,000 and are working with the Recreation Department and
ANC to make major improvements... This year they have gotten together
to repaint the pool-house and are making a cooperative effort
to install new fences and improve the baseball field as well as
to resurface tennis ad basketball courts.. ANC-2E has recently
allotted $500 to Volta Park, giving $500 each to Rose and Hardy
playgrounds as well.
"One of our members has analyzed the detailed February
crime report — the first comprehensible statistical report made
available to us by the police... some possible patterns.
"The police officers were making themselves known to all
block captains (guards, neighborhood watches).
From the University: The Office of Student Conduct and Pff-Campus
Affairs encourages Georgetown residents to contact their office
if there is a problem with students' trash and bulk items being
left behind... 'hot line" for community complain.
A letter from vice president of Reed Electric:
"..Being in the electrical business and an owner of property
in Georgetown, I have wondered many times why Fine Arts approval
was required just to replace a small lantern on the front of the
house when Pepco could ruin the looks of a gorgeous antique home
with their horrible meters with no Fine Arts Approval.
Now that you have helped correct this situation, it is now time
to start a campaign to have all existing meters in Georgetown
moved to inside."
A note on students: "we try to call them in and talk to
them when we have received a complaint, and I hope that in communicating
with each other, we get the point across. If not, we try again.
With Spring in the air, and the academic year end in sight,
let's try to fill these last months with good cheer, good will
and a good measure of tolerance. After all, we were all young
once."
Gossiping: The Washingtonian has it that the co-creator of Giorgio
Beverly Hills perfume, Gale Hayman, is now residing amongst us.
Having sold Giorgio to Avon Products for $ 165 million and divorcing
Giorgio's co-creator, she is now stirring up a "softer"
fragrance (called "Delicious"). In her new incarnation,
she is married to molecular biologist...Rumor is that the dynamic
duo reside on P St.
"Dogs and dryads": What started out as an innocent
look at Georgetown's streets and sidewalks from the viewpoint
of a dogwalker has uncovered a subtle and multi-faceted subculture
of almost Byzantine complexity...
The Aged Woman's Home of Georgetown, Wisconsin Ave., founded
by the Female Union Benevolent Society of georgetown on 1868!
— 11 old women no rent, with a private room and a kitchenette
each. The Home is privately funded.
June, 1994: a report on CAG annual meeting, describing
in detail emerging of a last-minute opposition to a new Board.
People attended were handed a brochure entitled "Bring Back
CAG; Elect the Residents' Slate" by a group of members. The
Brochure charged that "over the past two years, the officers
of CAG stopped representing the residents and started representing
special interests — the University, the developers, the liquor
lobby, etc... this Board and its slate have shown themselves to
be out of touch with our membership" etc. Yet the election
result was a win for the Board slate.
A police report stating April crime was down in Georgetown,
including theft from autos, with the only exception for the number
of stolen cars, that rose from 9 to 15 in comparison with 1993.
A resolution concerning future legal position on Hurt Home —
a typical situation: "Whereas, commencing on August 1987,
the District of Columbia Government, without consulting the Georgetown
community and in violation of applicable D.C. zoning laws and
regulations, contracted to purchase the Hurt Home at 3050 R Street,
N.W. in Georgetown for use by the Commission on Mental Health
Services as a residential treatment center for emotionally disturbed
children.." — postponed to be voted at June 1 special meeting,
after the Court of Appeals ruling. In all three pages out of eight
and an additional two page leaflet were devoted to the Hurt Home/Devreux
Childern's Center.
An article on the Washington Harbour restructuring produced
by Arthur Moore, the architect, with rather positive attitude
to the results.
Around Georgetown column gives a.o. that "we hear from
a neighbor of the International Scholl property at N and Olive
Sts. where apartments and townhouses are contemplated that the
Old Georgetown Board has asked the architect/developers to leave
more 'visual open space" and make the housing less dense,
but otherwise okayed the project".
Summing up, one is to state that thriving civic life is present
in Georgetown, that the community really cares for the place self-identity,
and that in spite of perpetual change of population, an imposing
number of newcomers are rather eager to join CAG or any other
civic organization, or some of them simultaneously, than to be
apart from that all.
While still in Georgetown, it is reasonable to look deeper to
what might be seen as the attempts to boost local activity from
just advisory position toward certain constructive actions going
far out the usual practice. In a way, it might be seen as the
beginnings of real self-government.
Neighborhood guard patrol in Georgetown is one of these
actions. A special leaflet issued in Summer, 1993, describes that
in the following way:
"As a step toward taking back the safety of our streets
and protecting our homes, the Citizens Association of Georgetown
has successfully established Neighborhood Guard Patrol Units east
of Wisconsin Avenue through our Neighborhood Watch program. There
has been a significant reduction in crime since the program was
initiated last May, 1993.
An unarmed, uniformed Wells Fargo guard patrols the streets
of the designated unit for 20 hours, 4-5 days per week, with a
varying time schedule based on the periods of risk.
The guard carries a cellular phone for direct contact with the
police and reports any suspicious activity immediately. A daily
report is filed by the guard with the designated Unit Captain.
Benefits of the Program:
- A visual deterrent to criminal activity.
- Guard has direct contact with police through cellular phone.
- Guard provides escort services to subscribers from house to
cars upon call.
- Guard provides check on street and house lighting and unlocked
cars.
- Guard reports on a daily basis.
- Guard will check front and rear doors of subscribers' home
when out of town.
- Wells Fargo provide subscribers with free home security check-up.
Operation and fees.
After the establishment of a neighborhood patrol unit and the
solicitation of 100 subscribers per area, CAG will contact with
Wells Fargo for the services of a guard. Subscribers cam choose
to pay an annual fee of $160 or a semiannual fee of $85.
These fees cover the payment to Wells Fargo and a small amount
covers CAG's administrative costs for billing subscribers, sending
out information, maintaining a separate bank account and paying
all bills."
Officer Ron Pander, with whom I managed to speak, is one of
security guards hired through a contract with Wells Fargo. He
walks his beat unarmed and says he figures the criminals see the
signs posted, see him and "just keep on going". Inspector
Kenneth Hutson, commander of the 2nd Police District, assured
me that D.C. officers are instructed to cooperate with special
police officers. Poppy Denham, leader of the Dent Place Association,
whose area Pander patrols, says that "it's a shame to spend
money that way — the City should be doing this work, but the police
can't get out and do these things. Visibility is the whole point.
People feel safer knowing the guard is there, and every member
has the guard's cellular phone number". Rod Johnston, the
organizer of a patrol area bounded by 26th, 28th, N and P streets
NW, said: "We are getting a high rate of return on our investment.
We were having about one incident a week, vandalism or an occasional
robbery or worse. Since May, 1993, we have had a total of two
incidents reported".
It is worth notion that the first attempt of this kind was in
1991, when a former D.C. police officer Bonnie O'Neal began a
similar service in Mount Pleasant for small businesses, apartment
buildings and private homes. The District government tried to
close O'Neal's operation in 1993, saying her guards should not
be allowed to walk between clients' buildings. Yet 6 weeks later,
the D.C. corporation counsel decided the city could not dictate
where the private security officers worked.
Baltimore has experimented with private security guards patrolling
the city's downtown area with funds raised through a special tax
— naturally there is a strong opposition from those parts of the
city that were nor covered with patrolling and it seems that the
Georgetown model is more successful, provided we are dealing with
neighborhoods, where living standard is more or less the same
for the residents (see The Washington Post, March 29, 1994).
In 1992, when I was working on a program for "Chistye Proudy"
neighborhood in Central Moscow, I've made that same proposal for
the self-government board, based on inviting active police officers
for after hours work, free-lance. It did not work at that time.
It is of interest that the cost of $15 (Rbls.30.000) per month
would not be considered exaggerated by those in Moscow who can
afford new housing as well as by a good part of those residing
in apartment blocks. As with other things, the Russian mix of
people with various education and varying income in any apartment
block makes any constructive scheme based on self-imposed payment
unrealistic.
Another question that is of greatest importance to my work in
Russia is the extent to which other than 'defensive' constructive
initiatives could be traced in Washington D.C. While working for
Moscow downtown neighborhoods I thought that a kind of local business
corporation for development could consolidate the active few in
order to propose a scheme that could invite far more people into,
and be an obligatory long-term action of any business, that would
possess or rent space inside the bordered territory. To a certain
extent I was surprised to know that in the majority of cases local
Business Associations are no more than 'clubs' for a fraction
of local businessmen. The only exception that I've managed to
find as yet is an initiative taken by Arthur J.Schultz, who had
proposed a paper on "Business Improvement Districts"
in April, 1993.
A long list of advantages to downtown improvement districts
was made, based on experience gathered nationwide and especially
in California where that movement had started as long ago as in
the 60s:
1. The district is one of the few ways to solidly organize downtown
and to keep it organized and running for the long term.
2. The district provides a firm, long-term funding base. It
is not dependent on capricious annual voluntary funding campaigns,
the vagaries of city budgets or the whims of federal and state
legislation.
3. Since the district is permanent or at least fairly long lasting,
it becomes possible to plan ahead for the mid- and long-term as
well as for annual projects and programs.
4. A district centralizes the decisions making power about downtown
firmly in the hands of the people most interested in downtown's
welfare. Those who will benefit or suffer are the ones to make
the decisions and pay the bills. The care!
5. Through a district, downtown can break free of public sector
control. The public sector is certainly not the villain, but it
is locked into certain complex considerations and may not address
the needs of downtown from downtown's perspective.
6. A district makes it possible to recruit and to pay a strong
staff to work for downtown. The jobs, the money and the long-term
prospects necessary for hiring good people exist within the district
structure.
7. Holdouts are wiped out. Property owners or tenants who often
refuse to support downtown under voluntary plans are all locked
into support via the district. The district has legally enforceable
powers to insure that everyone pays a fair share related to benefits.
The district can't force active participation but it can enforce
financial commitment.
8. The district puts strong financial leverage into downtown's
hands. Since funding is secure, downtown can borrow to finance
important projects that will through off long-term benefits in
return for initial high cash demands.
9. Finally, the district is a "businesslike entity".
It is not an amateur operation or bureaucracy. It is organized,
staffed and funded, topped by a real board, and enjoys the ability
to speak with one strong, clear voice in the community.
I could have signed under each line of that list — as it practically
coincides in both meaning and form with what I've proposed for
"Chistye Proudy" or "Yakimanka".
The question of what "fair payment" should be is complicated,
so it is worth notion that each one out of a number of Management
District in operation has chosen its own formula:
Orlando (established, 1972, 1000 acres, 1 ml annual budget)
$1.00 per $1.000 of assessed value;
New Orleans (1975-, 100 sq blocks, 6 ml annual budget)
10% of individual parcel -13,1 mil from assessed value;
Tulsa (1980-, 1,4 sq.mi., 0,710 ml annual budget) Gross
Area x Block weight x Base Assessment Rate;
Denver (1983-, 77 blocks, 1,781 ml annual budget) Assessed
on square footage;
Charlotte, NC (1984-, 37 blocks, 0,377 ml annual budget)
$.015 per $100 assessed value for Zone B — Zone A is $.03 (Mall);
Mesa, AZ (1985-, 1 sq. mi., 0,378 ml annual budget) Based
on parcel's square footage — base rate of $.01 per square foot;
St.Louis (1985-, 120 blocks, 0,415 ml annual budget)
$.034 per $100 assessed value;
Ft.Worth (1986-, 140 blocks, 0,793 ml annual budget)
Authorized for $.085 per $100 of assessed value — currently $.08;
Seattle (1986-, 15 blocks, 0,472 ml annual budget) Rate
for marketing $.20 per sq.ft., Rate for maintenance — $.10 per
sq.ft.;
Buffalo (1987-, 30 blocks, 1,270 ml annual budget) Basis
x Location Factor x Use Factor — % then taken of each one;
New York City (1988-, 50 blocks, Grand Central Partnership,
5,200 ml annual budget) $.10 per sq.ft.;
Portland, OR (1988-, 208 blocks, 1,870 ml annual budget)
$ 1.33 per $ 1,000 assessed value on each property;
Rochester, NY (1989-, 13 blocks, 0,400 ml annual budget)
50% of assessed value and gross area.
With all the differences, one feature is the same practically
everywhere — payments never exceed 1% of assessed value and usually
is no more than .1% of that.
We shall not discuss other cities' Downtown Development Districts
(New Orleans and New York examples are the most interesting for
our case, if Moscow is in mind, the more so, that the NY case
includes Brighton Beach Business Improvement District). It is
more interesting that the "Four Corner" project for
Georgetown, Washington D.C. never worked — the question of "fair
share" was never solved and conflicts between small business
and bigger business stopped the whole affair in its very beginning.
(I hope to get more information after a meeting with mr. Schultz).
Case-study 11: BZA (Board of Zoning Adjustment)
hearing
(in the D.C. Council building. July 28, 1994, 7 PM to 10 PM.)
Not only the subject was of interest (proposal to relax the
time limits for projects when opponents file court appeals challenging
the BZA decision), but the number of organizations present and
their character as well:
- a number of ANCs giving testimony,
- Federation of Citizens Associations,
- Residential Action Coalition,
- a number of local (Foggy Bottom, Glover Park, Columbia Plaza
etc.) citizens associations,
- Capital Hill Restoration Society and
- Committee of One Hundred on the Federal City (a closed urban
planners 'club' that invites members on recommendation ).
The initiative was issued by Wilkes Artis Hedrick and Lane,
the city's dominant zoning counsel, overtly representing the case
of the developers, although a lot of words on "public good"
etc. were said as well as the initiative meant to be a mere legitimization
of practices, they said, have been widely used already. As usual
a particular case was maid a precedental one: an owner of a big
mansion, 2110, Leroy Place, had not filed for permits "due
to the cost involved" and so, she would lose her rights.
As always, digging deep into the matter one is able to know that
the question was far more controversial: there was an Italian
mission at the mansion before, and the neighborhood did not want
that the place should be occupied by offices, being turned back
to its initial housing function — a permit was given by BZA in
its time to use the place for non-profit functions, yet the neighborhood
had enough ground to suspect that the change would be inevitable,
if the previous permit were prolonged.
The lawyers of Wilkes etc. got the floor for a long speech,
being followed first by the D.C. Building Industry Association
speaker and by each of the speakers for the opposite side.
It was especially instructive for me to register the high level
of argumentation, presented by both the ANCs and the public organizations.
All of them were quick to grasp the real meaning of the amendment
proposed, though they had little time to prepare their case (only
a week after it was publicized in the D.C. Register). All were
stressing that this was practically an attempt to deprive the
citizens of their only weapon against the developers' quick jump.
It was stressed that it never happened that the work strongly
advanced in construction would be torn down even if an appropriate
decision by the Court of Appeals were issued (examples testified
by the Capitol Hill Restoration Society), that any decision by
the BZA would of necessity be of provisory character and that
changes in situation and the attitude might have often cause the
BZA changing its decision etc. The general attitude was best expressed
by an independent voice presented by Robert Mead form Glover Park
Citizens Assn. :"No automatic action that might exclude the
public opinion, could be approved, whatever the reasons or the
matter" Peter Espershied, an activist from the ANC 3C, who
presented the necessity to make another amendment that would define
that no implementation process could be started till all the appellation
was considered in proper manner.
The Committee of One Hundred on the Federal City, presented
by Cornick Hitchcock, was harsh on the issue, stating that "the
Law is what Corporation Counsel says, but the Home Rule Act had
stressed independence of BZA" and that the property owner
could use a proposed tolling not only as a shield to his interest
but as a sword as well.
Two extracts are worth citing here.
One, coming from the Federation of Citizens Associations of
the D.C.: "The Federation objects most strenuously for a
body, like the Zoning Commission which enjoys quasi-judicial status,
to try to preempt influence or obviate a decision in a higher
judicial body by taking ex parte actions while that other
body is deliberating its decisions. The Federation believes it
prudent that the District authorities await the decision of the
D.C. Court of Appeals and not intervene in apparent subservience
to the proposals for a text amendment by a law firm which seems
to have far too much ex parte access to all zoning authorities
in the District".
And the other, coming from Dorothy Miller, giving testimony
for Columbia Plaza Tenants Association: "I have been instructed
to speak in opposition to any proposed change in the text amendment.
"It is the right to proceed" that bothers us the most.
This change will set a precedent for all other cases and take
away from the residents of the District about the only option
which they have to protect themselves from decisions of the Zoning
Authorities that adversely affect the health, safety and general
welfare of their communities.
"The second point in this tactical game that Wilkes Artis
is using in their request for a change in the text amendment is
a familiar one. This requested change is to prevent hardship and
expense for their client and as they put it "for general
good". Whose good? None except their client's and this is
not the main point. The communities should fear (1) the larger,
bigger and richer clients which will follow this client and (2)
how the proposed changes will adversely affect them and their
residents, the taxpayers of the District.
" Third point, we at CPTA are aware of the classic example
of what happens when holdings of courts/commissions and the rules
and laws are usurped. The expense of removing work that was started
or even completed when the court rules against the Zoning Authorities
far outweigh the inconvenience of time lost or the refiling expense.
It reminds me of the child who killed his parents and then asked
the Courts for mercy because he was an orphan. I am referring
to the case of the Western Presbyterian Church and the IMF who
was and is also represented by Wilkes Artis. They made certain
assurances to the community and the governmental agencies in their
proposal, which assurances have been totally disregarded. Undoubtedly,
the specifics with regard to the IMF/Western Presbyterian Church
and their joint development, as well as the violations will be
set forth by other witness/residents of the Foggy Bottom. It appears
that the end result of Wilkes Artis' representation and actions
result in the non-conformance with the rules and regulations and
the holdings of the governmental offices.
"Returning to my first point, the tactic being used here
by Wilkes Artis is one than showed up very clearly in the cross-examination
of this firm before the Stark Committee in the hearings respecting
the Height Act. Under oath Wilkes Artis admitted to providing
less than complete information to District Agencies, like the
Zoning Commission, the Mayor's Office of Planning and the NCPC.
Had these agencies received complete and correct information concerning
projects submitted for their approval, these projects would either
have been denied or modified. Certainly changes would have been
requested. Wilkes Artis then used the rulings and decisions by
these agencies, based on less than complete and correct information,
to obtain approval for other projects. They admitted to the Stark
Committee that they were involved in most of 20 or more cases
in which the Height Act had nor been adhered to. The "Finding
of Facts" proposed by Wilkes Artis in these cases were utilized
by the agencies, were published in the DC Register, and became
the laws of the District. The afformentioned tactics worked to
the disadvantage of the communities, the residents and taxpayers.
"In conclusion, we at Columbia Plaza feel that to-date
"the playing field" has nor been fair to the residents/taxpayers
of Foggy Bottom. To grant the proposal involved herein would further
handicap us and give added impetus of the rush of DC taxpayers
to the suburbs. Accordingly, CPTA request denial of the proposed
changes to the Text Amendment to 11 DCMR 3104.5 in Z.C. Case No.
94-10."
This long text is needed here to show how carefully and in what
a professional manner documents issued by public bodies like the
citizens associations could be and should be. It helps as well
to understand to what extent relative attention to the rights
of communities depends on the scope and the quality of actions,
like the one described above. One should have no doubt that without
this kind of communities' engagement into running city's policies,
the law would be nothing but letters, and that the executive authorities
would always favor the strongest lobbying groups.
Case-study 12: Interviewing Robin Stallings.
Scenery: a medium-sized apartment, that Stallings shares with
another young businessman, who is promoting a project of acquiring
a piece of land in Virginia for housing development of 24 units,
having experience, but no money, so it's a "friends' business",
without support from the Bank. Everything in the sitting-room
is upside down bearing signs of an election campaign the ashes
of which were still warm.
The young man was already two days after his failure with the
elections, accusing nobody but himself for not paying enough attention
to technicalities that proved to be of bigger importance. He was
disappointed and bitter because he felt the difference between
being beaten at the election proper or being pushed out after
so much time and money spent.
My question about the reasons for him, being a successful young
businessman, to endure all that trouble with campaigning was answered
in a way, that I've known good since my engagement with the Memorial
Society Conference in 1988/89. That's idealism for sure and yet
a hint of possible political career is there all right.
When I expressed doubt concerning his ability to really change
anything even if he would have won the election, Stallings responded
that he was sure that concentrating on several items every year
he could have managed to get the necessary majority of seven voices
among the 13. He was sure that the change for a model when the
City Council is turned to a Board for Corporation in order to
maintain financial City management with the Mayor turning more
a representation figure, was both needed and achievable. That
a possibility exists to lessen confrontation with the Congress
paying more attention to professional management.
It was more interesting for me to understand how small business
could be started and developed and to what extent the local Business
Assn. was a real force for changing things for the better. As
to the Business Assn. Stallings expressed his opinion that this
has been no more than a small 'club' not being representative
for the businesses in Adams Morgan and that two or three people
have led it for their personal pleasure. I am not so sure — it
might be that Stallings was not invited or could not see his position
there or he would prefer to build a kind of BID mentioned above
— it's a pity I had not enough time to check that with the business
associations around the City.
Some days later I was able to check Stalling's skeptical outlook
on the Business Assn. The August issue of "The InTowner"
paper included a bigger article by P.L.Wolff (I've discovered
later that nearly all journalists writing for small local papers
use pen-names) and titled "Adams Morgan Merchants See Threat
to Survival in New Comprehensive Plan Changes". It is obvious
that the article was an outward interference into the electoral
campaign though the essence might be deeper than that.
Pat Patrick, vice president of the Adams Morgan Business Association,
undertook a severe attack on Frank Smith, already mentioned above
as an acting Councilmember, standing for reelection, accusing
him of "in-camera proceedings without ever consulting with
the affected business owners about proposed changes". The
day before final passage of the plan revisions, the association
strongly opposed an attempt to give preference for business "serving
only local residents". It is worth paying special attention
to the wording of the proposal adopted by the City Council when
it listed among other development objectives for 18th Street and
Columbia Road in Adams Morgan "the provision and retention
of retail and services establishments needed by local residents
"be encouraged", instead of a regional clientele".
As I have been renting an apartment in Adams Morgan, it is easy
for me to stress that this populist thesis, would it be turned
into practice, would mean that Latino population, already being
near to 50% of the customers at local food-store, paying with
Food Coupons, would be considered first, while hundreds of tourists
and people coming from various parts of D.C. to enliven the streets
and to strengthen local tax-payers, would be secondary. "We
are pleased", the business leaders continued, "that
the Adams Morgan shopping area is one of the most successful in
the city: it is attractive to neighbors and tourists, it is multi-ethnic
and it has store that pay taxes and are not subsidized... If the
city wants to subsidize stores that will sell only to 'local residents'
we will be happy to support such city stores. It is an entirely
new idea in sales and we don't know where it is a success or even
where such stores exist. Why do you want to impose this restricted
sales plan on Adams Morgan businesses?". It is of interest
that such a big enterprise as Washington Hilton is participating
in the local business association. It is of interest that the
business association proved to play against the citizens associations
and the ANC with the case of the "Kelly Garage", but
it joined the attack on Smith from the other side, as the Council
has limited the projected parking garage capacity to "approximately
300-350 spaces", i.e. 200 places less, that would make a
deal with a selected private developer less profitable. The business
association was sure that the amendment introduced by Councilmember
Smith was meant to block the project in a "shy" manner
etc.
Stallings proved to be very professional in describing the ways
the small business like his own has been organized. He made it
clear that there was no chance to get a Bank loan, that only the
first promises by "The Nation's Bank" were expressed
in Washington to help creating new businesses, that the only way
to start, if not inherited money, was to get trust from a group
of relatives and friends and the friends' friends. That was exactly
what happened with his two projects: the building at the corner
of Champaign — he had organized a Limited Partnership, being himself
a General Partner (i.e. personally responsible) with 3 General
Partners more and rest of the Partners who now owned 3,5% of the
building each.
Only when approximately 40% of the sum needed was accumulated
did the Partnership Ltd. get a Bank loan. All of the partners
were ready to have their profit accumulated without demanding
it divided each year etc. The dark side of that was that both
Recession and the local riots had struck simultaneously, pushing
the real estate value in Adams Morgan some 10% down. Stallings
assured me that they survived because he never agreed to take
in more than 20% of 'liquid' money the partners had possessed
and because they were not paying tax for a year allowing it to
be accumulated and had no profit at all. As far as I could get
it, both the Bike store and the building could bring no more than
$60,000 a year at least 5 to 7 years more, which is not much.
It was interesting to know that the Bike store was also started
without loaning from the Bank, through good contact with the industry
that has given the partners credit for their product (it was 30
days free credit, so they had to work really hard to get to practical
turnover, achieving $1,000,000 in sales a year.
It is of interest that the general non-community tradition in
D.C. has made the place so retarded in promoting small businesses
and the Business Improvement Districts, compared to any other
City in USA. The hard breath of the bureaucracy omnipotence is
being felt in D.C. nearly as much as back in Moscow.
Case-study 13: Interviewing Stephen C.Taylor,
Legal counsel for Councilmember Jack Evans at the District Building.
Scenery: an office which, rather unexpectedly for me, is far
more chaotic than I could have imagined. It reminds me more of
the Moscow places, as if ready for a sudden assault, than clean
and neat offices of businessmen. It is obvious that everything
already is subjected to the goal of oncoming elections and that
the running affairs are allowed to gather without too much respect
for the paperwork.
Stephen Taylor, all smiles, is quite cooperative in manner,
yet I practically could not get new information — whatever he
cites I've already found elsewhere. So, the most interesting for
me is the manner in which information on the actual Counsilmembers
is presented in an official brochure. "The Honorable Marion
Barry, Jr.", a well-known former three terms Mayor (a Civil
Rights activist in his youth) is impertinent enough to run for
the Mayor once more. His scandalous behavior does not exclude
him from the run though — to cite the Brochure — "Marion
Barry experienced difficulties during the last year of his administration
stemming from his unfortunate addiction to drugs and alcohol.
He overcame those difficulties with a good treatment program,
support from his family and friends, and a deep abiding faith
in God. His characteristic perseverance and strong belief in himself
enabled him to learn from his adversity and to use it to help
others."
(It is fascinating how various political hypocrisy might look
in different Countries. Up to now, the text as cited above is
absolutely impossible in Russia, where "being not caught
one is not a thief", yet being caught once, one is definitely
thrown out. It might change however, and the dubious character
of the two political investigations after the 2 Putsches and the
Amnesty might change the Russian political life, making it a little
nearer to the American one. Especially, I think, it must change
when Russian business people will enter the political scene for
good — at least, the fact that quite a number of people were ready
to support Mavrodi, the MMM Godfather, against the Government
is expressive.)
Our discussion with Stephen Taylor was still more interesting
to me, as I was already well oriented to understand that whatever
was said should have been understood through a prism of oncoming
primaries, with Jack Evans obviously not yet making his choice
of a leading partner: John Ray or Marion Barry, or even Mayor
Kelly.
I've read already enough at that time to be prepared for some
joker to be on the table. So, it was no surprise to know about
two of them. One — a strong cut to the D.C. Budget imposed by
the Capitol Hill, that immediately revealed the mechanics of choosing
priorities by the Mayor and the Council — the Mayor being interested
in loyalty by the municipal servants, the Councilmembers seeking
for public support first of all. The second — was a strong move
from an unexpected side, when Superior Court Judge Steffen W.Grae
decided to place the Department of Public and Assisted Housing
in receivership, i.e. taking it away from the Mayor. Whether that
move (well motivated because of years and years of mismanagement,
not too surprising especially if one would consider that as many
as 13 directors to that department were changed during 12 years
of Barry and 4 years of Kelly as Mayors) was in fact initiated
by John Ray or not, is of less importance. Yet it made a strong
case for John Ray, who has got a magnificent card in his hand
against both rivals, while Mayor Kelly's attempts to answer with
accusations that he himself, as a Councilmember was just a passive
observer, did not sound convincing. Frankly speaking, I've lost
interest to those pre-electoral battle, because its political
nature was so obvious and that had so little to do with the ANCs
or citizens associations, or the communities, or the neighborhoods.
Similarity with the Moscow situation is more than transparent
— in neither place only political function for creating cliques
or defeating the rival cliques was and is considered "a real
thing" on the managerial top.
Supplement 1. Baltimore impressions.
The necessity to have a look on what is going on in a "normal"
city was obvious, as without that comparison it would be hard
to insist on the D.C. unique profile. I was lucky to have a prolonged
interview with two "veteran community activists", as
they were recommended to me by Charles Walker.
Betty Hyatt, who has been presiding over the Washington
Hill Corporation for 20 years and has resigned a week before my
visit, proved to be the most unusual personality. Her neat 2 bedroom
apartment is filled with framed prints (old maps, architectural
drawings and etchings) and books on History of Medieval Europe
and History of Architecture and Urban Planning. Betty is unusual
also, because she belongs to those few people who were born and
bred in Baltimore, living there all her life (her children and
their families are in Baltimore too).
The Washington Hill Corporation has proved to be that lucky
exception to the rule, that it was conceived in time, got proper
people on top in time and proper support from the City government
in time. The co-operative concept for renovating a set of 8 quarters
was approved by the Church parish, that owns a lot of land and
particular buildings in the vicinity, by some of land-owners and
by the City, and it was treated from the beginning as an Urban
Renovation District, which meant that the City subsidized it heavily
through a low-interest loan as well as through taking all the
extra costs. The final result is really impressing — old row-houses
were carefully renovated with some restoration of architectural
detail as well, some small business is there, and a racially integrated
community proved to be vital. Here they voted for a community
landscaping, maintained by a professional gardener. A common children
playground look well maintained as well.
From the beginning the initiative body managed to persuade the
City-Hall that they would not be a victim to overkill overlooking
from the government that proved to be a tragedy in so many cases,
so the budget has been worked out independently ever since. From
the beginning the group managed to secure its say as to the planning
process, so that an official planner was working with strong support
from the community in what considered research and analysis and
in close cooperation as to planing and architectural work on particular
quarters, buildings and courtyard itself. That led not only to
higher degree of consensus inside the community, but to a smooth
procedure of approving the plans by the Planning Office and major
economy with the implementation process.
The most important thing is real ownership, that contributed
to a balanced community, that takes in new members instead of
those who died or went somewhere else after careful examination
of their finance and them signing to certain social obligation
with the corporation. After gaining applause from the media it
was far easier for the corporation than for anybody else to come
to an utterly new phase of its development.
The corporation has started a non-profit program for further
improving adjacent quarters with the City-Hall assistance still
continuing. I've seen both completed quarters (the Corporation
has fulfilled a good job advertising, so a group of younger Baltimore
artists were happy to get a place there, and the quarters in transition.
A developing company, supported by the City-Hall has been operating
in Washington Hill for several years and they have a permanent
show — a renovated row-house with two apartments (3 bedrooms and
2 bedrooms) finished and furnished with old and new furniture
to look really inhabited. That works — a list of subscribers is
long, so that the Corporation has started a new quarter not yet
completing the one in progress, selling smaller houses and apartments
in bigger houses for low price (a 3 bedroom apartment costs $72,000
with $20.000 added by the city budget). Small businesses are well
seen there as well and the Church combines effort with the Corporation
with a program to renovate several row-houses belonging to it,
so that the whole street would look better and would be better
with inevitable rising of land value and the real estate value.
Resigning from her position with the cooperative, Mrs. Hyatt still
is the President for the Development Corporation and there is
no wonder that she was selected as the one to have a lively discussion
with Prince Charles when he paid a visit to Baltimore.
Mrs. Carolyn Boitnott, who is chairing a community Council
10 blocks further at the same street, presents another interesting
case. Her family owns a bigger row-house of four floors, she does
not need to work, so, with children grown up and out, she has
been a partizan for community control over the urban development
in wider scale. The community itself is in transition with some
upper middle-class urbanites coming in lately and with lower middle-class
families feeling bad about it, so with a big amount of work with
particular poorer families being done, nothing like a really mutual
action inside the neighborhood is possible.
On the other side, Mrs. Boitnott together with other activists
has been playing a key role in creating the Southeast Community
Organization (SECO), the Southeast Planning Council and the Southeast
Community Plan, presented to the Mayor's Cabinet in november 1993
and its updated version in Spring, 1994. Ever since the famous
"road wars" of the 70s — when they defeated the city's
plans to bulldoze their homes for an interstate highway — the
residents of Baltimore Southeast have relied on a network of community
organizations to improve the quality of life and protect their
interests. In an interview to the Business Record, April 8, 1994,
Charles Graves, the city planning director declared that he felt
excited by the plan because "it is a process where the community
took the initiative, other communities are now looking at that
model for developing other neighborhood plans" (If that was
says in ernest, that would mean Mr.Graves is not an architect,
as architects, with minor exceptions, just hate it when somebody
takes initiative).
The Plan got its start during a battle over encroaching luxury
waterfront housing in the late 80s. The development directly threatened
some working-class communities, and indirectly — a lot of others,
killing the waterfront view from their windows for good. It is
of interest that the Southeast Planning Council's work was significantly
funded by the Goldseker Foundation ($45,000), while the City Planning
and Housing & Community Development departments did provide
necessary technical assistance. The area was divided into four
quadrants and a series of workshops was held to identify local
problems and resources. Three task forces were established with
over 50 community participants and outside advisors. Five outside
bus tours were organized to acquaint southeast residents with
problems and opportunities outside of their immediate neighborhoods.
Mr. Graves found it important to stress that the Plan "is
not typical, because it addressed not only physical development
but also social and economic development" (I've always had
to deal with that kind of astonishment presenting my projects
to both the planning authorities and the municipal government).
The plan identified the plethora of urban problems, from declining
employment and an eroding manufacturing base to deteriorating
commercial strips and the spread of vacant housing. Then it proposed
more than 40 actions which southeast Baltimore inhabitants believe
are needed to combat those problems. None of the recommendations
are quick-fix solutions, which makes it so different from the
majority of community planning efforts in the USA and elsewhere.
Many, like a proposed industrial park, are to take millions of
dollars and many years to implement, others, like the affordable-housing
set-aside idea, or advance legislation requiring that developers
of publicly-assisted development projects recruit city residents
as a first source of skilled and unskilled labor, would need City
Council approval (which is easier with but 16 Counsilmembers,
representing 8 wards). Some ideas need time and effort to be implemented
but they can be started practically without delay, like initiating
a Baltimore Community Development Loan Fund to make available
flexible capital for business and affordable housing development.
And again some ideas, like increasing business-education links
or strengthening city/county alliances for mutual promotion of
economic development planning and labor force development need
nothing but a huge and long-term effort of dedicated people.
Most important is that the very fact of the Plan presented in
clear-cut form has already started to work: a community-based
group called the Patterson Park Neighborhoods Initiative has received
a two-year $300,000 grant from the city to strengthen housing
and home ownership. Safeway Stores that previously insisted on
building a luxury high-rise condominium on Boston street, in Canton,
now is working closely with the community groups in planning the
supermarket, which is much needed in the area, another study of
the Highlandtown business district is funded by the Goldseker
Foundation etc. Mrs. Boitnott has stressed in the interview that
"as important as the plan is, it's as important to continue
the planning process. This is just a starting point".
Supplement 2. The Philadelphia impressions.
It was definitely little time to get first-hand information
on Philadelphia set of problems, but enough to see it clear. We've
got a strong impression of a cross-cut through the City, starting
with charming downtown housing, renovated or gentrified, with
a lot of new fill-in structures in place of the disappeared ones,
with imposing freeways and city-houses, making small neighborhoods
amidst the woods, and ending with despair and decay at the western
Philadelphia, that wood fit the lower Bronx or Harlem in N.Y.C.
In a way, it was a strong warning against what may be the result
of the authorities' blindness in Russia. I've seen nothing like
that back home, but in ten to fifteen years up to a quarter of
Russian towns' territory might look the same way. That's a pity
that never, never have I succeeded in persuading the bosses to
open their eyes to the futures inevitable, predictable, calculable.
They would not listen to or they would impatiently shrug shoulders
— they have always had "really important things" to
think about.
The works by "Fight Graffiti Assn." on many a blind
wall are impressive for sure. Their artistic quality is secondary
to their social impact — we haven't seen a single mural that would
be covered by graffiti afterwards, and I am absolutely positive
that any work of art, that would be done for the people,
not with them (if only kids), would be covered with a carpet of
graffiti. The locals would feel it as an insult, they would have
revenged a work of art as if that were their deadly foe — I've
discovered that phenomenon in Russia in mid-60s, when they started
to break glass in that shiny telephone booths that were meant
to represent
"Progress": it was sufficient to break one window,
as to drag a hated thing down to the level of the surroundings
was the only subconscious goal.
The small community gardens, organized at some of the vacant
lots among row-houses, are charming indeed, and one can see how
important these things are, being a result of long-term effort
that had started with flower pots and minor repair of the fences.
I know what a profound amont of energy on the side of Anne Spirn
and other devoted people had to be spent in order to get to those
results, modest as they could seem to an unprepared eye. And at
the same time one gets a strong feeling of disproportion between
these efforts and the scope of social tragedy that could not be
helped much unless Federal money were directed to supporting the
right people on the right places, which thing rarely had happened
with any bureaucracy in the World.
The Community garden, cherished by Anne Spirn and maintained
by residents under Mr.Ford, a born leader with velvet manners
and authentic humor, is really something. Yes, it was the only
solution — to make it 50 small gardens with 50 gardeners, and
building the central "avenue" with its benches and a
gazebo, as well as inviting the "Fight graffiti Assn."
to make a beautiful pastoral mural upon the blind wall, which
architecturally "sets" the whole thing, has reflected
huge effort in creating the sense of carefully bordered commonness.
It is obvious that without professional assistance from one of
Anne's students that would never be achieved. I can imagine doing
thing like that in Moscow, somewhere in the city center, be it
Yakimanka or Cheestye Proudy and once again I feel how strong
is the impact of the housing construction type on making a "frame"
for human activity. Finding a place where 30 to 70 families could
have a place to fence as the "their place" is a problem,
as usually, because of the scale of the buildings, that would
be at least 200, which far exceeds the manageable task force.
Even if I could find such a place, and I could organize a mutual
effort for 50 to 70 gardeners, and I could help them create certain
common space, finding somebody who would work the same way as
the "Fight Graffiti Assn." would be the most difficult
task. It's like with our 'Democrats" who know better what
people would need than the people themselves. No problem in finding
an ambitious young artist who would make the work free of charge,
but to find one who would suppress his self-expression urge in
order to give kids their say, that's the problem. As far as I
know, all of the studios' leaders of that kind are rather using
children as perfect tools than helping them to do things. They
are competing with each other trying hard to 'beat' rivals with
artistic perfection of the result, not with humanity and fun of
the process.
And another remark: I could well imagine the gardeners in Moscow
giving the surplus to their relatives and friends, or to an orphanage
or a kindergarten free. Yet I can not imagine my compatriots imitating
these Philadelphians in what I consider the most beautiful — them
hanging bags with vegetables and fruits over the fence, so that
people who are deprived of that privilege of a garden (and it
is a privilege now, when there are 150 willing for a place that
soon is to be vacant) could take what they need. It is pragmatical
all right, as it blocks vandalism inevitable without that practice,
and yet more than that: with all the Russian Orthodox Church hypocrisy,
we have not had Christian tradition of doing good anonymous. Because
of that, in my practice of cooperation with residents I usually
rely more on vanity, egotism and the urge for self-expression,
that have been suppressed in Russia for ages, than on Christian
morale.
General conclusions
Hypothesis as to comparability between Moscow City and Washington
D.C. has been supported by research beyond doubt. Washington D.C.
is the US City that might be mirrored in Moscow attempts to create
the Home Rule after decades of suppression by the Federal bureaucracy.
That makes it so important to make deeper analysis of Washington
D.C. as a city in crisis with certain progress in what considers
the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions and the Citizens Associations.
The resulting knowledge and know-how might be practically used
for bringing the seeds of democratization to the Russian soil
at that neighborhood level where real Democracy might start the
sooner the better.
The field research in D.C. helps to understand that so much
in the nature of the city-in crisis has nothing to do with what
has been so often contradicted as 'capitalism' and 'socialism'.
Relation between self-government and the two bureaucracies — the
Municipal and the Federal ones — is far more important. The research
has proved that formal democratic process, that does not really
touch the self-government conscience and mentality, has as little
relevance to the state of the city, as the 'soviet' formal procedures,
that basic alternatives to the status quo urban policies might
be as well omitted through political polemics among rival candidates
in Washington D.C. as they have been omitted in Russia. Preliminary
research, that made it possible to be better equipped before interviewing
people, had disclosed really tremendous interdependence between
the level of legal knowledge, and the level of analytical habits
of the activists involved and the final results of their efforts.
I have understood that interrelation through my work home in Russia,
yet in D.C. I was still shocked by that explicity. No wonder,
the more well-to do (levelled to a degree) and the more educated
the neighborhood is, the better the results are. The more diversified
is the neighborhood (without including the 'underclass' level
of course), the harder the process, but the more interesting the
results are. When a really poor neighborhood is to be considered,
there is little hope for that to come to any valuable result without
incessant effort of the volunteers 'from outside'.
Comparison of experience gathered by a Russian, a US scholar
from Philadelphia, a scholar from Brazil and a scholar from Argentine
has proved to be most productive, because all of us have discovered
that some of the urban processes, especially in the underdeveloped
parts of the cities, have got similar structure with all the difference
in historical/cultural background. All of us seem to fight the
same mighty opposition, coming not only from the traditional urban
authorities, but from traditional architects and urban planners,
who have been formatted by the same classicist and the same modernistic
ideology (being direct continuation of the classicist tradition
to a degree the Pioneers could never believe.
There was not enough time to get deeper to the gist of the urban
maintenance and the urban management and to what might be changed
there, whether experience gained in Baltimore or other 'cities
per se' could be implemented in places like Washington D.C. or
Moscow, Russia.
Going deeper would mean getting to be better acquainted with
the ANCs and the citizens associations on a personal basis and
in conditions more favorable than the pre-election months, to
proceed with the analysis of the city budget and to the ways and
manners various groups of influence have or have not got a say
in that key matter.
Going deeper would mean proceeding with the analysis of the
so-called Comprehensive Plan — it seems to me that though the
Comprehensive Plan has more to do with reality than the so-called
Master-Plans of Russian tradition, a lot of underskin activity
goes unnoticed by the public.
Going deeper would mean as well getting better understanding
of the underlying thick of developers-lawyers-bureaucrats links
that might be the real social infrastructure in D.C. and in Moscow
with all the understandable differences taken into consideration.
| 
