UPDATED !

 

SOME D.C. Council members last week claimed ignorance about Mayor Adrian M. Fenty’s routing millions of dollars to the D.C. Housing Authority to expedite contracting for the renovation of select recreation facilities. In true District of Columbia procurement tradition, contracts were awarded to Friends of Fenty (FOF).

 

But the claim to have known nothing may not be accurate. Freelance journalist Valencia Mohammed, interviewed Council Chairman Vincent Gray’s son, who often is called “Carlos,” about renovations at the Girard Street Park. The work at the Ward 1 facility was done through a contract with the housing authority, according to Mohammed.

 

“I thought it was strange,” she wrote in an e-mail to TBR. “Young Mr. Gray provided all of the information that I needed about the developer.

 

“While certain members of the council pretend not to know anything about what Fenty was doing, I find that hard to believe,” Mohammed concluded.

 

Asked about this, Gray’s spokesperson, Doxie McCoy said, “The Chairman knows his son works for an office of DCHA [but it] is different from the branch that is involved in the projects under scrutiny.”

TBR also was reminded that Keith Lomax, whose RBK Landscaping and Construction was named general contractor for two recreation improvement projects, once worked at the Department of Parks and Recreation. He reportedly was recommended for the job by then-Ward 4 Councilman Fenty.

 

“He was a know-nothing employee at DPR and went out and got a business license,” said the source familiar with internal affairs of the agency. “Neil Rodgers then gave him a contract. 

 

“I don’t think it’s a good idea for Councilmember [Harry] Thomas to do the investigating when his very own chief of staff [Rodgers] who was then in the [DPR] hired him, knowing precisely who he was connected to,” the source added.

 

Rodgers could not be reached for comment.

 

MEANWHILE, Fenty last week renamed Ximena Hartsock DPR’s interim director. Readers will recall that the Chilean native was rejected earlier this month in a 7 to 5 council vote. There is some question whether the mayor’s appointment is legal. Attorney General Peter Nickles told the Washington Post, it is.

 

Anyone who has followed the mayor’s actions over the past three years should have expected he would make such a move. Moreover, Nickles warned that he intended to find a way around the council’s vote to disapprove the nomination.

 

Fenty may be motivated by reaction from Hispanics and his base of voters in Wards 1, 2, 3 and 6, who turned out in large numbers during the council’s confirmation hearing to praise the nominee–although she lacked direct, subject-matter expertise and had never managed an agency the size of DPR or a budget as large.

 

Hartsock has kept the pressure on, talking with any group or media outlet that put a microphone in her face. She claimed she was mistreated and discriminated against. (TBR responded in a previous edition to this accusation.)  The charge of racism and sexism are powerful weapons even when, as in this case, they have been deliberately misused.

 

But, the mayor isn’t so much defending his nominee as he is protecting his re-election agenda. Parks and recreation appear to have become an important feature in Fenty’s platform. Fixing a playground, ball field or recreation center serve as indisputable proof of achievement. What’s more, such facilities come with a constituency of dependable voters. The mayor knows that.

 

Hartsock followed Fenty’s directives in privatizing and closing daycare centers. She is sure to do whatever he wants in other areas as well. That won’t get her a permanent appointment. She knows that. But playing the mayor’s game may land her another nomination, should Fenty win a second term. At the very least, it buys her time to find another job. It’s a win-win for them.

 

For the council, however, unless members are ready to go to the mattresses, it’s another lose-lose.

 

 

 

SPECIAL EDUCATION BOONDOGGLE? 

 

ELAINE McConnell, president and chief operating officer of Accotink Academy, a therapeutic day school in Springfield, Va., is fighting efforts by DC Public School officials to pull students from her facility.  She defends her institution in a five-page letter, a copy of which was obtained from her attorney, A. Scott Bolden, managing partner at the Washington office of Reed Smith, LLP.

 

 

As many as 170 children from the District attend the Accotink Academy; their tuition is subsidized by the city under a federal law that requires the state to pay for the education of special needs children, when it is unable to provide such education in its own facilities.  Mayor Fenty and schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee have said that they intend to build the city’s capacity to provide services to such children. They have begun a campaign to return students, who for years have been placed at facilities outside of the District.

 

Equally important, DCPS officials said they want to ensure that when District children must attend out-of-state facilities, those sites are providing quality education and at the best cost to local taxpayers.

 

They raised concerns about the teaching staff at Accotink; the curriculum; appropriateness of special activities; and behavior modification techniques.

 

In the letter, dated October 22, McConnell called allegations by Richard J. Nyankori, deputy chancellor of special education, “entirely false and without any factual support.” She said that many District students come to Accotink “having never received remedial assistance for their emotional or educational disabilities.” But there are “dozens of students who, after graduation from Accotink Academy, have gone on to college or have gained employment holding responsible jobs.”

 

McConnell asserted that her staff utilize “differentiated instructional methods” to address the needs of students. Sometimes instruction is presented to the “whole class.”  As for the DCPS’ charge of “inappropriate usage of [Accotink’s] behavioral control center for minor infractions,” she said “Students who are disruptive are given three warnings before being escorted from the classroom to the time-out-room where they are given ten minutes, or longer if needed, to settle down.”

 

Another correspondence, dated October 23– this one from Bolden–demanded that DCPS provide evidence to support their “concerns” about the school. “It taxes credulity to understand how your office could have made any objective, qualitative, assessment of the educational programs, services or instruction provided by Accotink to DCPS students after only a few hours of ‘monitoring.’” Bolden wrote.

 

He said Accotink “remains interested in meeting with DCPS next week to learn from you the specific factual basis upon which you based each of your alleged ‘concerns.’”

 

Nyankori could not be reached. But Jennifer Calloway, the DCPS spokeswoman, said she was certain he had not received the letters.

 

No doubt the dispute will ultimately result in all or some DCPS students being brought back to the District for their education.

 

But individuals who work at Accotink or know personally of its operations have made other allegations about conditions at the school that are not answered in either the McConnell or Bolden letters.

 

Asking for anonymity, they complained of abuse of workers, including pay inequality—men receive more–argued that many teachers are not qualified; claimed McConnell has placed family on the payroll; and that she recently hired State Board of Education member William Lockridge’s son, hoping to provide some political coverage for the school.

 

Bolden, speaking on McConnell’s and Accotink Academy’s behalf, said the company is a “for profit, family-owned business. Two members of McConnell’s family are on the payroll. But he was unable to confirm whether Elaine McConnell actually receives a salary in her leadership role.

 

He disputed TBR’s assertion that money could be a motivator for McConnell, who told the Washington Post if the District pulled its students from the school, it would have to close.  “They didn’t create a for-profit business to get the District business,” said Bolden. “They were in business before that. The District came to them.”

 

Bolden could not provide any information about whether Lockridge’s son works for the school or whether men are paid more than women: “I have no information on that, nor do I believe that to be the case,” he said.

 

TBR asked if his client might make financial statements for the last two years available so that District taxpayers might know how much of their money actually is supporting the business and McConnell’s family and how much is going directly for classroom instruction.

 

“I will speak with them about that,” Bolden said, adding, “but I won’t be recommending it. Accotink is a private company and is not in the business of disclosing its financial records to reporters or columnists.”

 

 The District government reportedly is spending $200 million a year on tuition and transportation for its nearly 9,300 special education students.

 

 

 

SIDESHOWS & SOUVENIRS

 

“It’s like putting Bernie Madoff in charge of the SEC [U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission], “ one John A. Wilson source said to TBR last week, reacting to Chairman Gray’s announcement that Councilman Michael Brown would lead a subcommittee of the Committee of the Whole overseeing the taxicab commission.

 

Brown’s appointment last week came after Ward 1’s Jim Graham asked to have the taxicab commission stripped temporarily from his Committee on Public Works and Transportation. (TBR wrote at least three columns in this and other venues, calling for Graham to step aside after his chief of staff, Ted Loza, was arrested on charges of accepting bribes to influence legislation affecting the taxicab industry.

 

Graham has not been charged with any wrongdoing and reportedly he is not a target in the ongoing federal investigation. But, there were concerns that to continue to preside over taxicab issues meant either no business would be conducted as the probe advanced or any action the committee took might be questioned.

 

Some political observers and government insiders believe Brown is not much better. They point to his past dispute with the Wizards organization over season tickets; his decision while on the boxing commission to issue a license allowing Mike Tyson to fight in the District, although may other states refused such his application.

 

Reached Monday—after the first edition of this report—Brown said his critics are uninformed. “I was the youngest and most active [boxing] commissioner in the city’s history. I also did not take a fee to serve.”

 

There was another state that wanted to issue Tyson a license, Brown said, defending his efforts, which he claimed brought the District just under $10 million in hotel receipts. (TBR hasn’t checked his recordkeeping.)

 

Brown said as the temporary chairman of the committee on taxicab, he will focus on customer service, trying to determine how satisfied drivers and riders are with the current system and ascertaining whether changes are necessary.

 

Countering critics’ claims, Brown said, “Some folks are pleased that I’m not going to be the temporary chair. They know that I’ll listen to them.”

 

 

READERS’ COMMENTS

 

Jonetta,

 

I am very often amazed that you and some other columnists manage to fit things into your own perspective without regard to what anyone else says or even the facts. You have managed to do this nicely in this column. Maybe you are wrong for once. Maybe the Council treatment of Hartsock actually was wrong. And my reading of the broader community says that they actually think it was. Maybe you have a hard time accepting that a candidate like Clark can do something because he really believes it and believes that we can treat people decently even when differing with them.

 

I hope over the next year you will find it worth your while to accept that there are some people who do things for the right reasons. Maybe you won’t, but since I basically have always respected you I figure there is always the chance.

 

Yes, Clark is supported by people that supported Fenty’s run for Mayor and many of them actually still do. And yes Clark is supported by some of those that want to see Fenty defeated. An interesting base for Clark’s candidacy and an interesting dynamic, which I hope you will report on over the next 11 months. Clearly the support of people like Cora Masters Barry, Spence Spencer, Jack Jacobson, Greg Rhett, Brian Watson, Carlene Cheatam, Dorothy Ford and leaders of the community from every area and every Ward isn’t based on their support or upset with the Mayor, but rather they are supporting Clark because they believe in him.

 

And by the way Clark thought about running way before Fenty fired him and yes I was talking about setting up a draft committee to get Clark to run way before he was unceremoniously fired. And to this day neither I, nor Clark, nor anyone I know who is working to elect Clark has spoken to the Mayor about this. Actually the last time I spoke to the Mayor about someone wanting to run against a sitting Councilmember was when someone wanted to run against Schwartz and the Mayor told me in no uncertain terms that no one could beat her. Interesting perspective on his part in hindsight.

 

I for one am not looking for Fenty to endorse Clark, or come out against Phil. I believe that this race is between Phil and Clark- head to head. I think that in a race like that people will find that Clark is a well prepared candidate who has a real vision for this city which they share. Phil has never had one. “Nitpicker” as Phil likes to describe himself isn’t a vision, it is actually what you do when you don’t have a global vision for the future or overriding goals for helping people live better lives and achieve their dreams.

 

As to Tipper Gore coming to help raise funds for Clark. You seem to think that is a negative. I see someone who knew Clark for eight years and saw that Clark was a compassionate person with a commitment to public service, and knows his work ethic and came to tell people about that. As to raising money, well Phil is doing the same so like it or not money is needed to run a campaign.

 

Phil has had twelve years to raise it so Clark is merely trying to be competitive against an incumbent. Your using Brazil as your model is backwards. You seem to forget that he was the incumbent. Clark is actually going to use the Kwame Brown model of walking the District and going door to door to talk to people. It is Phil who may be the Brazil of this race and collect his money from the entrenched leaders of the District.

 

Those of us supporting Clark Ray really believe that this City is due for a Councilmember who doesn’t say no because the Mayor says yes, or yes because the Mayor says no. But rather a Councilmember who has a set of beliefs that will lead him to support the Mayor when he believes he is right and oppose the Mayor when he believes he is wrong. A Councilmember who will do only one thing, what he believes is right for the people of the District no matter which other politician agrees. That is the kind of person Clark Ray is and I would have thought by now that you would know that having had your own differences with him over the years.

 

Peter D.Rosenstein

Editor’s note: The writer is co-chairman of Clark E. Ray’s election committee.

 

 

The Barras Report is an opinion column published weekly except during July and August. The views expressed by the author are not necessarily those of JroseMedia LLC, which owns and operates jrbarras.com. All rights are reserved. Requests for reprints must be submitted to Jrosemedia@aol.com. Readers are invited to submit responses to the column at jrosemedia@aol.com; all letters will be published the following week.