DCist View RSS

Pandas Are Coming Back To The U.S. — And Maybe Soon, To D.C. 22 Feb 2024 11:09 AM (last year)

Giant pandas are coming back to U.S. zoos — starting with the San Diego Zoo. And D.C. could be next, a Chinese official hinted this week.

Pandas have been China’s most popular diplomats for decades: in 1972, the Smithsonian’s National Zoo received its first pair following Richard Nixon’s historic visit to the Communist nation. Since then, giant pandas have been one of the zoo’s top attractions — so much so, that these cute, furry, bamboo-eating bears have become entwined in D.C.’s identity, even emblazoned on Metro fare cards for years.

It was a teary goodbye for many locals when Mei Xiang, Tian Tian, and Xiao Qi Ji left the National Zoo for China last November, after the lease for the animals expired and was not renewed. D.C. wasn’t alone: pandas were recalled from all four U.S. zoos that had them. China watchers said it was a reflection of the rocky diplomatic relationship between the two global powers — at its lowest point in years.

This week, the San Diego Zoo announced it has inked a deal with the China Wildlife Conservation Association to bring pandas back. Then, at a press conference Thursday, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson suggested D.C. could be one of the next zoos in line.

“We learned that relevant Chinese authorities have signed new agreements with Zoo Madrid of Spain and San Diego Zoo of the U.S. on cooperation on giant panda conservation. There is ongoing consultation with the National Zoo in Washington D.C. and Schönbrunn Zoo in Austria on new giant panda cooperation,” said Mao Ning, the spokesperson.

“We hope that the new round of international cooperation on giant panda conservation between China and relevant countries will further enrich scientific research in protecting giant panda and other endangered species, and forge closer bonds between our peoples,” Mao added.

Relations between the U.S and China seemed to improve, following a meeting in mid-November last year between President Biden and President Xi Jinping of China. At a dinner after the meeting, Xi said pandas had long been “envoys of friendship” between the countries, and said China would “do our best” to bring the animals back.

Brandie Smith, director of the National Zoo, confirmed in a statement that the zoo is in discussions with China. “It’s always been our intention and hope to have giant pandas at the zoo in the future and continue our research here and conservation work in China,” said Smith. “After 52 years of success, we remain committed to giant panda conservation.”

Indeed, while the Panda House is empty, the zoo is spending $2.5 million redoing the habitats, in hopes of someday soon welcoming giant pandas back.

The post Pandas Are Coming Back To The U.S. — And Maybe Soon, To D.C. appeared first on DCist.

Maryland Counties Face ‘Hundreds Of Millions’ In Lost Property Tax Revenue After Mailing Snafu 22 Feb 2024 10:33 AM (last year)

This story was created by Maryland Matters and republished under a Creative Commons license.

Local governments face hundreds of millions in lower property tax collections after a state agency missed a key mailing deadline.

Maryland’s Department of Assessments and Taxation failed to mail about 107,000 updated property tax assessments before the deadline at the end of last year, according to senior state lawmakers. Left unfixed, county governments might receive a quarter of a billion dollars less in anticipated property tax revenue over a three-year period.

News of the error trickled out to key lawmakers and county leaders late Tuesday night.

“We haven’t gotten to the absolute details yet,” said Senate Budget and Taxation Committee Chair Guy Guzzone (D-Howard) on Wednesday. “We know it exists. We know there was a mistake made. We know that it’s significant. We rely on the assessments to be accurate and in all cases, right and so, they need to be accurate period.”

The State Department of Assessment and Taxation reviews property values on a triennial basis. Each county and Baltimore City is effectively split into thirds. Every year, one third of each jurisdiction is assessed with the property values phased in over three years.

There are roughly 2.3 million residential properties in the state. This figure does not include commercial properties, railroads or land owned by public utilities, which are also taxed but assessed annually.

This year, residential properties saw a nearly 26% increase in assessed value over the current value. Assessments on commercial properties during the same period increased nearly 18%.

In a statement provided to Maryland Matters Wednesday evening, SDAT’s director, Michael Higgs, explained what went wrong but vowed that property owners would receive their assessment notices soon.

“SDAT utilizes the services of the State’s preferred vendor, the League for People with Disabilities, for the printing and mailing of these reassessment notices, which are typically sent in the final days of December each year,” Higgs said. “This year, SDAT learned of an error in the League’s process that resulted in approximately 107,000 notices not being sent. The League has since resolved the error and the missed recipients will receive notices in the coming weeks.”

Many lawmakers still have not been fully briefed on the problem.

“We are very concerned about any instances of government officials missing legal deadlines to execute their duties,” said House Minority Leader Jason C. Buckel (R-Allegany). “While no one in our caucus has been briefed on what has happened with SDAT, media reporting makes clear that something has obviously gone wrong. We also want to make sure that property owners aren’t subjected to tax bills that are improper under Maryland law. It’s not their fault that SDAT may have failed to abide by Maryland law.”

Some details were consistent among interviews conducted by Maryland Matters.

Guzzone, Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore City) and House Ways and Means Chair Vanessa Atterbeary (D-Howard) and House Appropriations Chair Ben Barnes (D-Prince George’s and Anne Arundel) all acknowledged being initially briefed on the problem.

“Obviously, it’s very concerning,” said Ferguson. “I have heard that this is not the first time that something along this line has happened. And so, we’re exploring options for what might be possible but obviously everyone has to pay their fair value.”

The late assessments touch every county and all property classifications that are assessed by the department.

Atterbeary called it a “big mess up.”

Atterbeary, Ferguson, Guzzone and Barnes all said they are just starting to search for a solution.

Left unaddressed, the problem could cost local governments an estimated $250 million over three years.

Both Guzzone and Atterbeary confirmed the size of the potential fiscal hit to local governments.

“It’s a big loss of revenue,” said Atterbeary. “We’ll need a one-year fix and look at how SDAT is structured and does it continue to make sense.”

Part of that fix could include emergency legislation to allow the assessments to be sent out late while protecting property owners’ right to appeal.

The department could put in an emergency bill that allows lawmakers to move quickly to extend the already expired deadline.

“It doesn’t necessarily have to be done in a standalone bill,” said Guzzone. “It could be in another something already existing.”

One such vehicle could be Senate Bill 1027, sponsored by Guzzone, which defines the term “taxpayer” as it applies to property tax appeals.

Atterbeary said lawmakers could also consider putting the changes into the Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act, a separate piece of legislation that is different from the operating budget, used to implement a variety of legislative and financial actions.

But extending the deadline after the fact will raise eyebrows and may draw a legal challenge.

Higgs said SDAT is working with lawmakers to craft a solution.

“The legislation will ensure that the State reassessment can be completed fairly and accurately and that all appropriate revenues are collected,” he said. “Every account in this group will receive a notice in the coming weeks and will be provided with the full 45-day timeframe for appealing the reassessment.”

The effect on state and municipal government budgets is unclear.

“I didn’t get a total number, but it was in the hundreds of millions of dollars, not in the tens of millions,” Ferguson said. “My guess is that would make sense, based on the increased assessment this year, being I think it was, overall, a 20% increase in value overall. So that seems consistent.”

Property taxes are the largest source of revenue for local governments.

“This news is alarming, but we are thankful that legislative leaders have already signaled their intentions to take swift action on this issue,” said Baltimore County Executive Johnny Olszewski Jr. (D), the current president of the Maryland Association of Counties. “It’s critical we ensure local jurisdictions receive their fair share of revenues so that we can remain focused on delivering the core services that our shared residents rely on and expect.”

Criticism of the agency and its director

The latest news about SDAT comes after legislative budget analysts earlier this year identified internal problems in the agency, including a significant shortage of real property assessors on staff, and that the accuracy of property tax assessments continues to worsen.

It is also likely to draw attention to Higgs, the agency’s director.

Higgs was appointed by-then Gov. Larry Hogan (R) in 2016. It was Higgs’ second appointment by the two-term Republican governor.

Initially, Higgs, a telecommunications attorney from Montgomery County, was appointed in 2015 to serve on the Public Service Commission. At the time, he was also chair of the Montgomery County Republican Central Committee.

Higgs’ posts on the social media platform then known as Twitter derailed his confirmation to the commission, which regulates utilities in Maryland.

Higgs has served in the Department of Assessments and Taxation since 2016. Gov. Wes Moore (D), Hogan’s successor, opted not to replace Higgs upon taking office 13 months ago.

Barnes said he and his colleagues on the Appropriations Committee were less than pleased with the responses SDAT officials gave them at the agency’s budget hearing this year.

“At the Appropriations Committee, we’ve felt a bit aggrieved by SDAT this session,” he said.

Barnes, who said he just learned about the SDAT snafu early Wednesday, said that the first priority for lawmakers will be to make sure that counties are not forced to deal with an unanticipated shortfall due to the revenue shortage caused by the delayed tax assessments.

“We’re going to do what we can to help the local governments,” he said. “They can’t absorb that.”

Barnes also predicted that House leaders would look for changes at the agency.

“Long-term, the Appropriations and Ways and Means committees are going to have to look at reforms at SDAT,” he said.

Atterbeary agreed.

“There’s a larger issue,” she said. “There was talk of maybe restructuring it, bringing it under the purview of the [state] comptroller. I think that is worth a conversation. I think this issue underscores that.”

Josh Kurtz contributed to this report.

This breaking news story has been updated throughout the day.

The post Maryland Counties Face ‘Hundreds Of Millions’ In Lost Property Tax Revenue After Mailing Snafu appeared first on DCist.

The Smithsonian Could Return Many Of Its Collected Human Remains Under New Policy Recommendations 22 Feb 2024 9:30 AM (last year)

New recommendations from a Smithsonian task force will soon require the institution to dedicate more resources to returning as many human remains in its collection as possible by the year 2030 — with a priority on the Native American and African American communities many of them were taken from.

Returning the remains to family members, descendants, or related communities will be no small task, given that the Smithsonian has a collection of more than 30,000 bones, hair, brains, and fetal remains, most of it under the care of the National Museum of Natural History.

The new report — which was compiled by the institution’s Human Remains Task Force, sent to Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie Bunch in January, and made public Wednesday — provides recommendations on what the Smithsonian policy should be on handling and returning human remains in its collection. After Bunch’s review, the policies are set to become official in the fall, according to a Smithsonian spokesperson.

The report from the task force, a group of scholars, curators, and museum directors from within and outside the Smithsonian, minces no words on the long-discredited racist theories of scientific racism that fueled much of the collecting and researching of the remains.

“Historic inequities facilitated the expropriation, curation, and unconsented use of human bodies,” one section reads. “This is our unfortunate inheritance, a racist legacy that burdens the Smithsonian and prolongs this injustice.”

Among the remains are an early 20th century collection of brains acquired from D.C.-area residents, many of them Black, without their consent, a Washington Post investigation revealed in December. Those brains and others are currently stored in a facility in Suitland. (Post reporter Nicole Dungca discussed the investigation on WAMU in January. DCist is owned by WAMU.)

Nearly half of the thousands of human remains in the larger collection belonged to Native Americans. Of those, more than 6,300 body parts have been returned or offered back to the families and communities they came from in response to the 1989 National Museum of the American Indian Act. Many of the remains were acquired during the early to mid-20th century through purchases, trades, donations, and plundering, though collection continued into the 21st century through “archaeological excavations, institutional transfers, body donations, and forensic casework,” according to the report.

“While much of this collecting of human remains was done by curators and individuals long dead, it occurred at the Smithsonian and relied on the Smithsonian’s resources, reputation, and influence,” the task force writes in the report. “The original intent of collecting these human remains was morally abhorrent, because it sought to prove the superiority of white people and their descendants to Native Americans, African Americans, and others through scientific means that are now thoroughly discredited.”

The Smithsonian’s goal is to establish ethical standards and to “seek justice for those harmed or exploited,” the report states.

The collection includes roughly 6,000 remains belonging to individuals who have been identified fully or with part of their names or initials. The Smithsonian will prioritize returning those remains to descendants or relevant communities and organizations, as well as those belonging to Native Americans, Indigenous people from other countries, and African American communities.

The report recommends that the Smithsonian streamline its returns processes and dedicate more staff and funding toward this effort. It also lays out suggested procedures for how to properly handle remains when a descendant cannot be identified, provides guidance on how to memorialize unidentified remains that go unclaimed, and aims to restrict research on the overall collection. It would mandate that all future collections of human remains will only take place with consent of family members, descendants, or their communities.

The recommendations came out this week, but Secretary Lonnie Bunch has made regular statements on the human remains policy since January 2023.

“Human remains is really an important and sometimes problematic subject for museums,” Bunch told DCist/WAMU in an October interview. “What we want to do is ask the fundamental question of what is the role of human remains? Should we have human remains?” He added that the purpose of the task force was to craft policy recommendations that treat “these items not as specimens but as humans.”

These recommendations will shape the revised Smithsonian human remains policies that will be made public in the fall, a spokesperson said. In the meantime, the Smithsonian has paused all research on the remains and additions to its collection.

The post The Smithsonian Could Return Many Of Its Collected Human Remains Under New Policy Recommendations appeared first on DCist.

D.C. Attorney General Shuts Down Recruitment Firm For Exploiting Dozens Of Foreign Exchange Teachers 22 Feb 2024 9:04 AM (last year)

Dulce Maria Nuñez Zaldivar says she never thought she could become a labor trafficking victim to another country. But in 2017, she says she left her job at a highly reputable middle school in Honduras in hopes of advancing her career through one of the U.S. State Department’s exchange programs.

After researching programs and companies that she thought could help her, she was recruited to work at a school in D.C.’s Columbia Heights, where she currently teaches English language arts to sixth graders. In order to make the move to the United States, however, she says she used her and husband’s savings to pay for the cost of visas and moving.

Not long after, she says they quickly fell into debt and struggled to keep up as a result of paying high fees each month to Earl Franciso Lopez, the owner of multiple D.C.-based recruitment firms.

“I remember I opened my bank account on my phone and I had five dollars,” Zaldivar told DCist/WAMU. “In that moment, I felt like ‘Oh my God, what did I do?’ That has been so far one of my worst moments ever.”

Zaldivar is not alone. On Thursday, D.C’s Office of the Attorney General announced the settlement of a lawsuit against Lopez and the multiple companies he operated, saying he lied in order to fraudulently recruit dozens of foreign exchange teachers to work at District schools.

According to the OAG’s office, Lopez was found to have exploited 61 teachers — all of whom were initially recruited to work at D.C. public or charter schools – lying to them about his affiliation with the U.S. State Department, and making false claims about being an official visa sponsor with the ability to fire and deport teachers. He also charged the educators with high fees, while failing to follow through with the services they were promised.

“The Office of the Attorney General is committed to standing up for all District residents and ensuring no one is exploited—including members of our diverse immigrant community,” said D.C. Attorney General Schwalb in a statement.

The OAG’s office says an investigation was opened into Lopez after they received multiple complaints about the high fees and exploitation, and subsequently a lawsuit was filed against him in 2019. The investigation showed that Lopez and his companies misled teachers into signing unfair contracts by telling them they were only allowed to work in D.C. schools if they signed with him and paid monthly visa fees (which were subject to high late fees). In reality, his companies were third-party recruiters and charged teachers much more than legitimate companies. Lopez also charged teachers fees for training and professional development but failed to provide them. In addition to the fees, Lopez also threatened to fire and deport teachers who failed to pay their monthly fees or did not want to renew their contracts.

“In this case, hardworking teachers came to the District as part of a cultural and educational exchange, committing themselves to enriching the lives of thousands of D.C. students while navigating complicated visa requirements,” said Schwalb in a statement. “Instead of providing these educators with the help and support he promised, Mr. Lopez took advantage of them, overcharging them for services and threatening retribution if they complained.”

According to the office of the OAG, Lopez used multiple companies based in D.C., including the Bilingual Teacher Exchange, Ives Hall Consulting, Inc., and Bert Corona Leadership Institute, Inc., to recruit experienced educators, primarily from Colombia and other Latin American countries to the U.S.

Dulce Maria Nuñez Zaldivar still works at the same D.C. school and says she hopes she can put the experience in the past now that the case has been settled.

“I see myself with my family, with my husband and my child, just finally being happy. And finally being able to just live a normal life. Because this has been a very hard burden to carry with us,” says Zaldivar.

Lopez will now be permanently barred from operating any teacher recruitment firms under the terms of the settlement. He will also be required to pay a minimum penalty of $30,000 for five years, which is subject to change based on his reported income. If Lopez violates the terms of the settlement — including missed payments, falsified financial disclosures, or wage theft — he will be required to pay $1,000,000.

All 61 teachers who came to D.C. will also receive restitution payments from Lopez as a result of the fees, threats, and exploitation they were subjected to. In the coming weeks, the OAG says it will be sharing more information for those teachers who are eligible.

The post D.C. Attorney General Shuts Down Recruitment Firm For Exploiting Dozens Of Foreign Exchange Teachers appeared first on DCist.

11 Things To Do Around D.C. This Weekend 22 Feb 2024 6:21 AM (last year)

FRIDAY, FEB. 23

INTERSECTIONS FESTIVAL: Ballets, cabarets, dances, plays and a whole lot more will be taking the stage this season at the Atlas Performing Arts Center for the annual Intersections Festival. The celebration, which lasts over two months, kicks off this weekend with performances from A.F.R.O.B.A.M., Capital City Symphony, Silk Road DC and more. (Atlas Performing Arts Center; through April 27; $32)

MOTHER TONGUE FILM FESTIVAL: This week, the Mother Tongue Film Festival returns to the National Museum of the American Indian, the Natural History Museum, and other Smithsonian institutions across the city, showcasing films that uplift multilingual storytelling and endangered languages. (Smithsonian; Wednesday-Saturday; FREE)

MORE: GAMEmason (George Mason University; Friday and Saturday; $24), REACH to Forest (Kennedy Center; through March 3; FREE), Tony Neville Watercolor Demonstration (McLean Community Center; 11 a.m.; FREE), Art Bites Gallery Talk: Humanscape 62 (Smithsonian American Art Museum; 12:15 p.m.; FREE), James A. Lafayette, Revolutionary War Spy (Southwest Neighborhood Library; 4 p.m.-5:30 p.m.; FREE), Nate Scheible Tape Release (Rhizome DC; 7 p.m.; $10+), Seven Black Minutes: Black History Month (Busboys and Poets Anacostia; 7 p.m.-9 p.m.; $20), Shimmy Time! Belly Dance Technique & Drills with Sacred Hips in Motion (Joe’s Movement Emporium; 7 p.m.; $20), Vincent Lauzer plays Bach and Telemann (Live! at 10th & G and St. Paul’s Episcopal Church; Friday and Saturday 7 p.m.; $40), Young Playwright Theater’s Ovation Showcase (Prince George’s Community College; Friday at 7:30 p.m., Saturday 2:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m.; $15+), Live Comedy Showcase Starring Brendan Gay (Crystal City Sports Pub; 8 p.m.-10 p.m.; $15+), Yonder Mountain String Band (The Hamilton; 8 p.m.; $30)

SATURDAY, FEB. 24

ICE YARDS: Dust off your ski suit and head to Navy Yard for Ice Yards, a wintry party featuring iceless curling, penguin bowling, an outfit contest, and an impressively long shot-ski. Local outposts like District Winery and Ice Cream Jubilee will be offering pop-up bars and to-go meals. (The Yards; 1 p.m.-4 p.m.; $15)

BLACK BREWERS TASTING PARTY: Raise a glass to D.C.’s Black-owned breweries this Saturday at metrobar’s Cheers and Beers: Black Brewers Tasting Party. Your ticket buys you about a dozen tasting pours from local purveyors including Black Beauty Brewery and Strange Fruit Brewing. (metrobar DC; 2 p.m.-5 p.m.; $25)

CUMBIA PARTY: Takoma is getting a healthy dose of cumbia this weekend at Rhizome’s Day Cumbia Party, an afternoon concert featuring performances by experimental cumbia band Victor Arce and DJ Kristy La rAt, as well as Mexican tacos and refreshers. (Rhizome; 2 p.m.-6 p.m.; $5+)

UNCAGED FILM FESTIVAL: Black, queer stories are taking the big screen this Saturday at Uncaged Film Festival, presented by Cagedbirds Productions at Anacostia Arts Center. The evening will feature seven short films about the lived experiences of queer Black people, followed by panel discussions. (Anacostia Arts Center; 6 p.m.-10 p.m.; $10+)

COLOR ME (CURLY): Fashion and cosmetology collide with music and dance in Color Me (Curly), a multidisciplinary hair show that takes the Dance Place stage this Saturday. Featuring local hair stylists, fashion designers, models and dancers, Color Me (Curly) is a celebration of Black hair’s cultural and political significance. (Dance Place; 7:30 p.m.-9:30 p.m.; $30)

MORE: Invasive Plant Removal at Carter Barron Mini-Oasis (Carter Barron Amphitheater; 10 a.m.-12 p.m.; FREE), Sticky Fingers Grand Opening (Sticky Fingers Takoma; 10 a.m.-12 p.m.; FREE), Tree Walk at Kingman Island (Kingman Island; 10 a.m.-12 p.m.; FREE), Hill Family Biking: Community Clean-up Ride (Maury Elementary Parking Lot; 10:30 a.m.-12 p.m.; FREE), Mexican Radio Day (Bluejacket; 12 p.m.; FREE), Claudia Jones School’s 4th Anniversary Party (Embassy of Nicaragua; 1 p.m.-5 p.m.; FREE), Since I Been Down screening (Mason Exhibitions Arlington; 1 p.m.-3 p.m.; FREE), Monet Paint and Sip (Bryant Street Market; 1:30 p.m.; $45), Omnium: A Bold New Circus (Capital One Hall; 2 p.m.-4 p.m.; $39), The BLKR the Berry (Joe’s Movement Emporium; 4 p.m.-6 p.m.; $25), Jazz@Wesley Presents Nom (National United Methodist Church; 6:30 p.m.-8:30 p.m.; $12), Capital City Symphony: Battles Within (Atlas Performing Arts Center; 7 p.m.; $32), An Enemy of the People: A Public Health Project (National Academy of Sciences; 7 p.m.-9:30 p.m.; FREE), F*ck The Past: A Comedy Show about How the World Got So Dumb (City-State Brewing Co.; 7:30 p.m.; $15), Portugal. The Man (The Anthem; 8 p.m.; $45), White Ford Bronco (9:30 Club; 8 p.m.; $25), Cryfest: The Cure vs. The Smiths Dance Party (Black Cat; 9 p.m.; $20), Don’t Miss: Flee + B Jack$ (Culture; 10 p.m.-3 a.m.; $25+)

SUNDAY, FEB. 25

CARLOTTA WALLS LANIER: Carlotta Walls LaNier, the youngest of the Little Rock Nine, is coming to the McLean Community Center this Sunday to discuss her experience as the first Black girl to graduate from Little Rock Central High School, and sign copies of her 2009 memoir. (McLean Community Center; 12:15 p.m.; $75)

ENTER THE DRAGON: Martial arts legends Bruce Lee and Jim Kelly star in Enter the Dragon (1973), marking Lee’s final film appearance before his sudden death. Catch the film this weekend at the National Museum of African American History and Culture, where it screens as part of both Black History Month and Lunar New Year programming. (National Museum of African American History and Culture; 2 p.m.-4 p.m.; FREE)

NATIONAL SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA OF UKRAINE: The National Symphony Orchestra of Ukraine is returning to the U.S. for the first time since the Russo-Ukrainian conflict escalated in 2022. See Grammy Award winning conductor Volodymyr Sirenko lead the orchestra, which features renowned cellist Natalia Khoma, this weekend at George Mason. (George Mason University; 2 p.m.; $41+)

HAUSCHKA: If you watched All Quiet on the Western Front (2022), you know that Hauschka’s music is unforgettable. The German composer, who nabbed an Academy Award for his work on that film, is bringing his experimental classical music repertoire to the Hamilton this Sunday. (The Hamilton; 8 p.m.; $20+)

MORE: Walking Tour: Lost History of Frederick Douglass in Capitol Hill (Library of Congress; 9 a.m.-10:45 a.m.; $20), Struggle and Triumph: Black History on Pennsylvania Avenue (Old City Hall; 10 a.m.-12 p.m.; $35), Championing Black Art: A Conversation with Myrtis Bedolla (Smithsonian American Art Museum; 2 p.m.-4 p.m.; FREE), Profs & Pints DC: Race and Fast Food (Hill Center at Old Naval Hospital; 3 p.m.-5:30 p.m.; FREE), Seven Deadly Sins (National Gallery of Art; 3 p.m.-4:15 p.m.; FREE), Queer Black Broadway Walking Tour (U Street Corridor; 3 p.m.-5 p.m.; $30), Environmental Justice Book Club (People’s Book; 4 p.m.-5 p.m.; FREE), Love J.A.M. 14: A Musical Revue (BalletNova Center for Dance; Friday 8 p.m.; Saturday 3 p.m. and 8 p.m.; Sunday 5 p.m.; $25), Pa’Lante Serie Cultural Latinoamericana: A DMV Showcase (Joe’s Movement Emporium; 6 p.m.-8 p.m.; $15), u up? A Natural Wine + Pizza Date with Softshell (No Kisses; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; $10)

The post 11 Things To Do Around D.C. This Weekend appeared first on DCist.

Popular Bagel Shop Call Your Mother Gets Into The Coffee Business 21 Feb 2024 12:20 PM (last year)

Popular D.C. bagel chain Call Your Mother is getting into the coffee business. Expect its coffee, called JoJo’s, to be sold at all Call Your Mother locations beginning Thursday, Feb. 22.

JoJo’s will be roasted at the bagel chain’s newest location in Old Town Alexandria, which also opens Thursday. Washingtonian first broke the news.

To start, Call Your Mother is roasting 100% arabica coffee beans grown in Brazil for its drip coffee. So expect a nutty, sweet flavor from your medium-dark roast cup of JoJo’s. Patrons will still be able to order lattes and cappuccinos, but Call Your Mother will just use its own beans. (Until now, the chain has partnered with D.C. roaster Lost Sock coffee for its beans.) The cost of coffee drinks will stay the same, according to co-owner Andrew Dana.

Call Your Mother, named one of the nation’s best bagel shops (outside of New York) by Bon Appetit magazine last year, is entering the coffee business because it’s something Dana has wanted to do since launching the bagel shop in D.C.’s Park View neighborhood back in 2018, he tells DCist/WAMU.

“We just didn’t really have the bandwidth,” he tells DCist/WAMU. “I’ve always wanted to control the sourcing and just really be hands on with the coffee.”

Launching JoJo’s was a matter of timing, he says. Call Your Mother is buying the beans through Huckleberry Roasters, which is the brand the chain uses for its Denver locations. (Call Your Mother expanded to Denver, Colorado in 2022.) The new Old Town location also has the space to roast coffee in house, and the roasters will be displayed at the shop so customers can see the process.

Dana and his partner in business and life, Daniela Moreira, named JoJo’s after their one-year old daughter. The couple hopes to expand beyond the Brazilian bean, trying out different single-origin coffees and blends.

“Once we’re really comfortable with just roasting and sort of executing every day then we want to do special releases,” Dana says.

Call Your Mother’s new Alexandria location is the 10th to open locally. The chain also has three Denver locations. Call Your Mother also sells bagels on weekends at the Dupont Circle and Silver Spring farmers markets, but don’t expect JoJo’s there just yet.

Dana attributes the bagel chain’s growth to having a dedicated staff, who earn at least minimum wage plus tips and receive benefits including a health insurance match plan and retirement match plan. The head of coffee is someone who started as an hourly-wage worker at the owners’ other business Timber Pizza Company, says Dana.

“Our growth is like staff centered,” Dana says. “Very early on, we told our staff don’t look at this as just a restaurant job. Look at this as a startup where you can build a career.”

This story has been updated to include an interview with co-owner Andrew Dana. 

The post Popular Bagel Shop Call Your Mother Gets Into The Coffee Business appeared first on DCist.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore Responds To Concerns That His Proposed Housing Legislation Overreaches 21 Feb 2024 6:51 AM (last year)

This story was produced by Maryland Matters and republished under a Creative Commons license. 

Gov. Wes Moore (D) said his housing proposal will give “incentives … not mandates” to local jurisdictions as the administration tries to address Maryland’s ongoing housing shortage, according to his testimony in the House Environment and Transportation Committee Tuesday afternoon.

“This is a piece of legislation that is not heavy-handed, it really more works hand-in-hand,” Moore said during his first appearance before a legislative committee this General Assembly session. “We’ve wanted to make sure that every aspect … really showed that we planned on working with local jurisdictions.”

Moore unveiled his legislative priorities in January, including the housing package which is composed of three pieces of legislation. But there have been questions about whether the housing package oversteps the authority granted to local government officials and priorities.

The balance between state and local authority is a frequent point of contention whenever the General Assembly considers new statewide regulations or deregulation. But Moore signaled interest in collaborating with local governments to bring affordable housing options across the state.

“We knew there was a level of concern, because a lot of jurisdictional authority oftentimes sits with local leaders. We understand that, and we respect that. We also know that at a time when we have such a massive housing shortage where we’re looking at … over 96,000 unit shortage within the state of Maryland. We’ve got to find a way of being able to work together, to be able to address that kind of shortage,” Moore said.

The legislative package includes bills that create an Office of Tenants’ Rights to provide renters resources, set up a new state entity to manage federal investments for low-income communities, and provide “density bonuses” for certain development projects that include affordable housing options, among other measures.

“This is not about ‘how can we usurp zoning laws?’ This is about how we can come up with a better way of working in partnership …without taking a measure of jurisdictional authority away from local jurisdictions,” he told the committee.

The governor’s appearance is not the first time he came before a committee to testify on a bill. During the 2023 session, he attended several committee meetings to support legislation.

This contrasts with his predecessor, former governor Larry Hogan (R) who served for eight years but never weighed-in at hearings on bills that were under consideration by the primarily Democratic General Assembly.

Moore said that the “housing crisis remains one of the greatest threats to our state’s success” and hopes to increase the “supply” of affordable housing to help address the issue.

HB 599, referred to as the Housing and Community Development Financing Act of 2024, would create the Maryland Community Investment Corporation, a state entity that would make loans or investments aimed at developing and improving low-income communities.

“It will help ensure that we secure more federal investment. As we all have learned — I like federal investments,” Moore said of HB 599.

He said that the organization will be charged with “drawing new funding from the U.S. Treasury and investing that money in communities with high concentrations of poverty.”

The Senate version of this legislation, SB 483, will be heard Thursday in the Senate Education, Energy, and the Environment committee.

HB 538, named the Housing Expansion and Affordability Act of 2024, would allow certain development projects to exceed typical density limits if the new development incorporates a certain percentage of affordable housing units.

The goal is to incentivize new affordable housing development by permitting new properties to be developed with higher density and in a more expeditious manner in exchange for providing cheaper housing units.

The legislation could use some tweaks, said Baltimore County Executive John Olszewski Jr. (D), who is the president of the Maryland Association of Counties. Still, Olszewski said he is in favor of the legislation.

“The governor’s legislation is much needed, with tools and incentives to benefit local housing productions where development is appropriate,” Olszewski said. “However, consistent with feedback from my counterparts in local government, we do believe there are a few changes that could be made to ensure that this housing production does not preempt local land use authority or impact critical community infrastructure.”

The final housing bill in the Governor’s legislative package is HB 693, also known as the Renters’ Rights and Stabilization Act of 2024. The bill sets up an Office of Tenants’ Rights in state government, which would help tenants know what protections and legal actions they have under Maryland law.

To reduce the number of unnecessary evictions, HB 693 would increase the fee that a landlord pays to issue an eviction from $8 to $93. The additional funds would go to state housing assistance and vouchers to help struggling Marylanders find housing.

The bill also would give tenants residing in a rental property the right of first refusal if the landowner wants to sell the property. Tenants would have an opportunity to purchase the property before a third party could buy it.

Matt Losak, co-founder and executive director of Montgomery County Renters Alliance, urged Maryland lawmakers to pass stronger protections for renters in addition to pushing for new housing developments.

“While we absolutely support the idea of building more housing … we do not believe we will be able to build our way out of the rental housing crisis that we are seeing for so many renters,” Losak told the committee.

“It is a good idea that homeownership be a goal, but the fact is now, not only in our state but across the country, a majority of renters are never going to be able to buy their own homes. They are going to choose renting as a way of life for the rest of their lives,” he said. “In addition to building new housing, we must consider renter protections are necessary part of this balance.”

The post Maryland Gov. Wes Moore Responds To Concerns That His Proposed Housing Legislation Overreaches appeared first on DCist.

Supreme Court Declines To Take Fairfax Magnet School Admissions Case 20 Feb 2024 10:10 AM (last year)

The Supreme Court decided against hearing a legal challenge to the admissions policy at Thomas Jefferson High School Of Science and Technology, a top Northern Virginia magnet school.

The challenge argued that changes to the school’s admissions policy are biased against Asian American students, who make up a majority of students at TJ. The current admissions policy does not explicitly consider race, but was created with the intent of increasing diversity through things like socioeconomic factors and a student’s feeder school.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court declined to review an appellate court’s ruling upholding the admissions policy, which the Fairfax school board put in place in 2021 after years of concerns about a lack of diversity at the school. That ruling will now stand, effectively ending a three year legal battle.

The Fairfax school board hailed the decision.

“We have long believed that the new admissions process is both constitutional and in the best interest of all of our students. It guarantees that all qualified students from all neighborhoods in Fairfax County have a fair shot at attending this exceptional high school,” said Karl Frisch, who chairs the school board and represents the Providence District.

The case was brought by the Coalition for TJ, a group of parents affiliated with or formerly affiliated with the high school. They were represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal advocacy group that has been involved in a series of cases challenging diversity policies in competitive high school admissions.

“Today, the American Dream was dealt a blow, but we remain committed to protecting the values of merit, equality, and justice — and we will prevail for the future of our children and for the nation we love and embrace,” said Asra Nomani, co-founder of Coalition for TJ and a former parent at the school, in a statement.

TJ’s revamped admissions policy got rid of the school’s high-stakes admissions test and a $100 application fee, and instead considered students’ grades, an essay, middle school class rank, and GPA. It also took into account race-neutral factors like socioeconomic status, whether students were English language learners, and whether they attended a public middle school that tended to be underrepresented at TJ (previously, the majority of students came from about eight ‘feeder’ middle schools).

Those changes resulted in what The Washington Post called “the most diverse class in recent history.” The class of 2025, the first admitted under the new policy, featured a much higher percentage of low-income students, English language learners, and girls, and for the first time included students from all public middle schools in the county.

But the Coalition for TJ argued the policy — while neutral on its face — had the intent of promoting diversity at the expense of Asian American students. The legal case argued that the declining share of TJ admissions offers given to Asian American students in incoming classes was evidence of discrimination (Asian American students still received the highest total number of offers). It also cited text messages and comments from members of the Fairfax school board and TJ’s principal discussing the need for the admissions policy to produce classes broadly reflective of the Fairfax community as a whole. That logic, the Coalition argued, constituted “race balancing,” and demonstrated anti-Asian bias.

The Fourth Circuit found in favor of the school last year.

“Expanding the array of student backgrounds in the classroom serves, at minimum, as a legitimate interest in the context of public primary and secondary schools,” Judge Robert B. King, a Clinton appointee, wrote in the majority opinion at the time. “And that is the primary and essential effect of the challenged admissions policy.”

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented from their colleagues’ decision letting the lower court’s decision stand.

“What the Fourth Circuit majority held, in essence, is that intentional racial discrimination is constitutional so long as it is not too severe,” Alito wrote. “This reasoning is indefensible, and it cries out for correction.”

The decision to allow the Fairfax admissions policy to stand comes less than a year after the Supreme Court struck down race-based affirmative action in college admissions, in a case that also featured charges of bias against qualified Asian American students. The TJ case was widely seen as a barometer for how much further the conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court might be willing to go in reversing schools’ attempts to promote diversity in their student populations.

The legal wrangling over the admissions policy at TJ put the school at the center of conservative political pushback against Northern Virginia schools, along with disputes over teaching about race and inclusive policies for transgender students.

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin brought the issue up on the campaign trail in 2021 as part of his focus on “parents’ rights.” Early last year, Attorney General Jason Miyares launched an investigation into TJ after parents complained of a delay in distributing National Merit letters of commendation to students, and he promised an investigation into the admissions policy at the same time. Both issues, he said, were possible indications of anti-Asian American sentiment at the school, though there was no immediate evidence of racial animus. A law firm hired by FCPS to assess the delay in the commendation letters found no evidence that the school had purposefully withheld them.

The post Supreme Court Declines To Take Fairfax Magnet School Admissions Case appeared first on DCist.

Maryland Could Follow D.C. With Ballot Initiative On Tipped Minimum Wage 20 Feb 2024 9:17 AM (last year)

Much like D.C. voters did in 2022, Maryland voters might get to decide whether to phase out the state’s tipped minimum wage. Maryland Delegate Adrian Boafo plans to introduce a bill by the end of February that would put the contentious issue of tip credit before voters this November — though the bill’s path to passage will be a challenge.

“Taking it to the voters really allows us to see not only what our constituents want, but also what workers actually truly want,” the Prince George’s County Democrat tells DCist/WAMU.

Currently, employers of tipped workers like restaurant servers are allowed to pay those customer-facing workers a base wage of $3.63 per hour as long as customer tips increase their total earnings to at least the state’s minimum wage of $15 per hour. If tips fall short, employers must pay their workers the difference so they earn the minimum wage. The elimination of this practice, which is known as a tip credit, would fundamentally disrupt the state’s restaurant industry.

Lawmakers in Maryland counties near D.C. already tried this to no avail. There were bills in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties introduced late last year that would have phased out tipped minimum wage in both counties, but the sponsors of both bills pulled them, saying they would defer to statewide legislation instead.

Boafo delivered that legislation, proposing a bill earlier this year that would prohibit employers from claiming the tip credit beginning in January 2027. But the Democrat representing Prince George’s County withdrew that bill last week and now says he will soon introduce a constitutional amendment, which means putting the issue on the ballot if it passes.

He believes the constitutional amendment has a likelier chance of passing the legislature based on his conversations with colleagues, he says.

“We just realized that we were doing it in a more difficult way,” Boafo says of his original bill. “Our conversation was just being held in a silo in the General Assembly and this will impact 106,000 people.”

The move also follows an unenthusiastic state Senate hearing on the issue. Several lawmakers expressed skepticism at that hearing after few Maryland restaurant employees showed up to testify in favor of eliminating tip credit. Even so, the bill’s primary sponsor in the Senate, state Sen. Arthur Ellis, has not withdrawn his bill — a companion to Boafo’s in the House — to phase out tipped minimum wage by 2027. It’s unclear if he supports putting the issue to voters; his office did not respond to request for comment.

Boafo’s new legislative strategy mirrors action taken in neighboring D.C., where residents voted in 2022 to phase out the tipped minimum over five years. Similar to D.C.’s ballot initiative, known as Initiative 82, Boafo’s proposed constitutional amendment would end the tipped minimum wage over five years, instead of three like his original bill.

Boafo’s proposed ballot measure would also establish customer protections around service charges, requiring restaurants with fees to clearly indicate to patrons where the money goes — language he says came from observing the District. Since the passage of Initiative 82, more and more D.C. restaurants implemented extra fees to offset the increased expenses — but owners are not always clearly communicating where the money goes, prompting guidance from D.C.’s Office of the Attorney General and lawsuits from a consumer group.

Boafo worked with One Fair Wage, the national organization that helped get Initiative 82 on the ballot, on the new legislative strategy. The group is optimistic because of a poll it commissioned that found 68.1% of 816 registered Maryland voters support raising the minimum wage for tipped workers to “$15 an hour with tips on top.”

Boafo wants to phase out tipped minimum wage because he believes that will increase the total earnings of restaurant workers, he tells DCist/WAMU. The median hourly wage of bartenders and servers in Maryland was $14.52 and $14.09 in May 2022, respectively, according to the U.S. Department of Labor — and that is only slightly higher than the state’s minimum wage at the time, which was $12.20-$12.50 per hour depending on the size of the employer.

Boafo’s thinking is if workers’ base wages incrementally increase and their tips stay consistent, they’ll have a higher take-home pay. He believes customers will continue to tip even if they know workers earn minimum wage. But he worries customers won’t tip at restaurants that charge a fee, which is why he wants to include language around service charge on the ballot.

The Restaurant Association of Maryland, a trade association representing hundreds of restaurants in the state, disapproves of efforts to eliminate tip credit because it believes the current system allows tipped employees to maximize their total earnings while also reducing labor costs for restaurant owners, many of whom own small businesses with thin profit margins.

The group and the National Restaurant Association have pointed to D.C. as an example. According to an analysis by the national group, full-service restaurants in D.C. cut jobs by 4.4%, or 1,300 positions, between May and November 2023, while jobs in the same sector increased by 7.5%, or 2,000 positions, during the same period in 2022. But a different analysis from One Fair Wage disputes that, showing D.C. restaurant jobs have modestly increased between November 2022 and 2023. One Fair Wage also says it is too soon to determine Initiative 82’s effects as it is not fully implemented — that is currently slated to happen in 2027.

In D.C., restaurant workers have so far described mixed results since Initiative 82 started to take effect in May 2023. Some workers tell DCist/WAMU that they have seen the wage bump Boafo hopes for in Maryland, while others say they earn less now because they make less in tips. D.C. restaurant workers, on average, made $1 per hour less in tips and overtime, between January 2022 and October 2023, but their hourly wages and total earnings have increased, according to data from popular point-of-sale system Square.

But before Marylanders weigh the pros and cons of phasing out tipped minimum wage, Boafo’s bill to put a constitutional amendment before voters must pass. It has various obstacles to overcome, including passing out of two different committees by mid-March and passing the House by a supermajority of members in April. Boafo admits the path is very challenging and the bill might be tabled until next session.

Meanwhile, ballots are pending in a few other states, and One Fair Wage is assisting in those campaigns. Already, seven states have banned tipped minimum wages and the District is on its way to doing the same.

The post Maryland Could Follow D.C. With Ballot Initiative On Tipped Minimum Wage appeared first on DCist.

Your Questions About The Massive D.C. Crime Bill, Answered 20 Feb 2024 8:13 AM (last year)

Earlier this month, the D.C. Council cast its first of two votes on an omnibus public safety bill with about 100 provisions. The bill, called “Secure DC,” is a combination of provisions from a dozen different crime bills the council has previously considered, with some new ones tacked on. Secure DC is currently scheduled for a second vote before the D.C. Council on March 5, where councilmembers are likely to propose additional amendments before ultimately passing it and sending it on to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser for her approval.

Because the bill is so long — and because it tackles a variety of policy issues ranging from gun penalties to food quality at the D.C. Jail — you’d be forgiven if you were somewhat confused about its contents. So we solicited your Secure DC questions, and put the most frequently asked ones (along with their answers) together in one place for you.

If you have a question we didn’t answer here, email me at jgathrig@wamu.org and we’ll consider adding your question to this post in an update!

What is Secure DC? Can you give a quick overview of the bill?

This bill has 100 provisions, so there would be nothing quick about an overview. But here’s a non-exhaustive list of what the bill does, just to show how wide-ranging it is:

• Ups the penalties for certain gun possession offenses, and creates new gun offenses like “endangerment with a firearm,” which criminalizes firing a gun in public
• Broadens the definition of carjacking to include cases where a person might be a bit farther away from a person’s car, responding to concerns from prosecutors that the current definition of carjacking is being narrowly interpreted by the courts
• Requires several public safety-related government agencies to share more data about the outcomes of diversion programs, 911 errors, pretrial supervision, and more, either with the public or the Mayor and D.C. Council
• Amends or relaxes certain police reforms passed by the D.C. Council in recent years, including vehicular pursuit and neck restraint policies
• Expands a rebate program for residents who purchase private security cameras for their homes
• Tilts the law to favor more pretrial detention for adults and children accused of crimes categorized as violent or dangerous
• Creates a felony charge for strangulation
• Raises the age of child victims for which people convicted of sexual abuse face additional criminal penalties
• Creates a new “organized retail theft” offense for planning/directing theft from stores
• Ups the potential penalties for thefts of $500 worth of property or more
• Re-establishes a prohibition on wearing masks under certain circumstances (like for the purpose of concealing your identity while committing a crime or intimidating someone)
• Delays the implementation of a law that would ban cashless businesses
• Allows the police chief to designate certain areas “drug free zones”
• Issues guidance for more nutrient-dense food at the D.C. Jail, and creates a hospitality vocational training program for people detained at the jail
• Creates a Director of Emerging Adult Services to work on improving city services like education programs, workforce development, housing, and health care for justice-involved young people aged 18-24
• Mandates that both law enforcement and the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice hold meetings to review recent shootings and target services/interventions to people at risk of being shot (DMPSJ says these meetings are already happening)
• Allows police to force people who evade Metro fare to provide their true name and address, or be subject to a fine.
• Allows the agency that supervises people on probation to impose GPS monitoring on those who violate their conditions of release without an order from the court or the parole commission (The agency has been doing this, but the D.C. Court of Appeals recently ruled that it was unlawful – which means that without this explicitly written into D.C. law, hundreds of people would be taken off electronic monitoring)

To read the full bill and all of the amendments the council has passed, go to the D.C. Council’s website here.

Can you clarify what the latest version of the bill says about collecting DNA? 

A previous version of Secure DC changed the rules for when law enforcement can collect DNA samples from people accused of crimes and enter them into a national database. It would have allowed law enforcement to collect a person’s DNA at the time they are arrested. Then, it would allow law enforcement to analyze it and enter it into a national database either once the person has been charged with certain crimes or once a judge has determined that law enforcement had probable cause to arrest them. This provision was struck by an amendment before the council’s first vote on the bill. As of now, Secure DC won’t change the laws on DNA collection.

Under current D.C. law, law enforcement can collect DNA samples from any person convicted of a felony or certain misdemeanor sexual abuse offenses and then enter them into an FBI database called “CODIS,” so that law enforcement agencies across the country can have access to the samples as they investigate crimes. Prosecutors can also obtain warrants for DNA samples from defendants during the course of a pending case.

Which criminal penalties are being changed? Does Secure DC create new mandatory minimums? 

In addition to changing penalties for some retail theft offenses, Secure DC would increase penalties for several gun possession offenses –including possession of a machine gun or “ghost gun” (the term commonly used to refer to a gun that people assemble at home, which doesn’t have a serial number and is, therefore, less traceable to law enforcement).

Secure DC would also create new gun offenses – like an offense for endangerment with a firearm (shooting a gun in public), an offense for discarding firearms and ammunition on someone else’s property, and an offense for possessing a stolen gun or a gun with a tampered serial number.

The bill also creates penalty enhancements for violent or dangerous crimes in certain locations – like Department of Parks and Recreation facilities – and crimes against certain groups of people, including vulnerable adults, Metro passengers and employees, and rideshare, taxicab, and food delivery drivers.

Secure DC doesn’t create any new mandatory minimums, but there are two new statutory minimums in the bill. The two are slightly different: under a mandatory minimum, people must serve the entire length of the sentence in prison – but a statutory minimum allows judges to release someone to probation, for example. The new statutory minimums are for possessing a firearm with an obliterated, removed, or altered serial number (people convicted of this crime would be subject to “no less than 2 years nor more than 10 years” of incarceration), and for possessing a firearm with intent to sell it (also “no less than 2 years nor more than 10 years”).

How would the bill change the threshold for felony theft, and what is the intention behind this change? 

Under current D.C. law, the definition of “first-degree theft” is stealing property that has a value of $1,000 or more. It’s punishable by either a fine or a maximum of 10 years in prison. People who commit any kind of theft after being previously convicted of theft two or more times are subject to harsher penalties — including a mandatory minimum of one year in prison and a maximum of 15 years in prison.

Secure DC would make the theft laws even stricter, by lowering the threshold for first-degree theft from $1,000 to $500. So under the law, people convicted of stealing $500 worth of property could be subject to that maximum 10-year sentence. Secure DC would also make it a felony to commit theft two or more times within six months if the aggregate value of the stolen property is $500 or more.

The rationale behind the change is, essentially, that police will be more likely to arrest people – and prosecutors will be more likely to charge people – if they are more likely to receive some kind of punishment. Ward 2 Councilmember and Judiciary Committee chair Brooke Pinto, who is spearheading Secure DC, has said in hearings that she’s repeatedly heard frustration from police officers and residents that people who steal are often “no-papered,” which means prosecutors don’t pursue charges against them. (The U.S. Attorney’s Office might disagree with this characterization as of late; they recently released a spate of press releases announcing indictments of people for enhanced second-degree theft, which could potentially subject them to that mandatory minimum of one year in prison.)

Critics of lowering the theft threshold argue it introduces disproportionate penalties, making an iPhone thief potentially subject to harsher penalties than someone convicted of misdemeanor sexual abuse.

There’s been a lot of information going around about the face covering provisions of the bill. What does this section of the bill do? What would it mean for people who wear masks to protect against illness or people who wear religious face coverings? 

Secure DC would make it illegal for any person over the age of 16 to wear a mask or any other kind of accessory that covers a substantial portion of their face in public – but only under circumstances. Those are as follows:

• You can’t wear a mask to hide your identity while you commit a crime or engage in conduct prohibited by civil law
• You can’t wear a mask if your intent is to deprive any person or class of people equal protection under the law
• You can’t wear a mask to threaten, intimidate, abuse, or harass someone else

An earlier version of Secure DC also made it illegal to wear a face covering with the intent of causing another person to “fear for [their] physical safety.” That piece was struck in an amendment proposed by At-Large Councilmember Christina Henderson, who worried it was overly broad and subjective.

Pinto has said the rationale behind this provision is to give officers more discretion to stop people who they believe are wearing masks with the intent of committing a crime. Pinto’s office says the law is structured in a way that prioritizes stopping the behavior, rather than immediately arresting someone for it.

Some advocates say the language of the bill is still overly broad. The provision that criminalizes intimidating someone else while wearing a mask, for example, potentially makes it illegal to yell at someone while wearing a mask.

What new provisions roll back the measures put in place after George Floyd’s death?

The bill changes reforms in several major areas:

Release of disciplinary records

Secure DC changes a law the D.C. Council passed that would allow the public release of police disciplinary records (the law was not funded in the city budget, so it has not yet gone into effect). Under the not-yet-funded police reform law, the city would have been required to release information about officers’ medical histories and their use of counseling programs – but only if the information was a material issue in a complaint against them, or if they were mandated to go to counseling through the disciplinary process. In contrast, Secure DC would explicitly allow the city to redact all of an officer’s medical or counseling records.

Neck restraints

Secure DC would change the city’s laws governing police neck restraints. Under current law, a “neck restraint” is defined as any time a police officer applies pressure against a person’s neck “with the purpose, intent, or effect of controlling or restricting the person’s movement, blood flow, or breathing.”

The latest version of Secure DC would get rid of the word “movement” and add an exception for times when an officer is acting in good faith to provide someone with medical care. So, the text of Secure DC defines a “neck restraint” as any time an officer applies pressure against a person’s neck “with the purpose, intent, or effect of controlling or restricting the person’s airway, blood flow, or breathing, except in cases where the law enforcement officer is acting in good faith to provide medical care or treatment, such as by providing cardiopulmonary resuscitation.”

Proponents of the bill say it addresses an issue that’s come up in MPD, where officers are facing disciplinary action in cases where they were genuinely trying to help a person or protect them from themselves, or where their contact with a person’s neck was accidental. Some opponents, however, worry that rolling back the restriction on controlling a person’s movement goes too far.

Vehicular pursuits

D.C.’s police department has a strict policy on police vehicular pursuits, in recognition of the danger they present to the public in a crowded city. There is a history of fatal police pursuits in the District; in one recent case, a D.C. police officer was found guilty of second-degree murder for chasing 20-year-old Karon Hylton-Brown in his police cruiser; in the course of the chase, Hylton-Brown drove his scooter out of an alley and was hit by an oncoming vehicle.

As part of a package of police reforms, the council made it illegal for police to engage in vehicular pursuits unless they have exhausted all other options and they believe that a fleeing suspect has a) committed or attempted to commit a crime of violence or b) poses an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury to another person. The law also says police can only pursue someone in a vehicle if the chase isn’t likely to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person.

Under emergency legislation the council passed over the summer, the policy was relaxed. Police pursuits are still limited to cases where it’s the only remaining option for police, and where a fleeing suspect has committed or attempted to commit a crime of violence, but they are now allowed to chase someone who presents an “imminent,” not “immediate” threat of death or serious bodily injury to another person. Under the emergency legislation, police are also no longer required to consider whether the chase would seriously injure the suspect. They can chase someone, the law says, if it is “under the totality of circumstances, not likely to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person, other than to the fleeing suspect or suspects.”

Secure DC adopts the same language as the emergency legislation.

Body-worn cameras

Secure DC reverses a law that prohibits officers from reviewing their body-worn camera footage before writing police reports, though it will still prohibit officers from reviewing their cameras in cases where they killed someone or used serious force against them.

Supporters of the change say that it will allow police to write the most accurate possible reports because the footage is better than an officer’s recollection. Policing experts at the Police Executive Research Forum argued in a recent publication that if officers aren’t allowed to view the footage before writing their report, discrepancies between their initial report and the footage could unfairly undermine their credibility in court, even when the officer had no intention of being deceptive.

Opponents of the policy, including the Public Defender Service, argue that an officer’s in-the-moment impression is an important, separate piece of evidence in a case. And they worry officers will insert things they see in the footage – but didn’t notice at the moment – into their narrative of an event.

Secure DC also does away with a requirement that police inform subjects that they’re being recorded by their body-worn camera.

I’ve been hearing a lot about the bill’s “drug-free zones” provision. What would it do?

The bill would allow D.C.’s police chief to declare certain 1000-square-foot areas of the city “drug-free zones” for set periods of time. Here’s how it would work: the police chief could decide an area should be a “drug-free zone,” and then the department would put up posters around that zone in advance to alert the public that the area will be designated as “drug-free.” Then, for five days — and at most 15 days out of 30 days — it would be illegal to congregate in groups of two or more people for the purposes of committing a drug offense. If police reasonably believe people are committing a drug crime in the zone and they don’t obey orders to disperse, officers can arrest them.

It remains unclear how these drug-free zones would feel and look in practice. Critics of the policy worry it could enable harmful police harassment or simply disperse drug activity a short distance away. Some councilmembers have also questioned whether the policy would give police any new powers to address open-air drug activity in the city since they are already allowed to stop and arrest people who are breaking drug laws.

But councilmembers who support the policy say they trust the police chief and Mayor when they say it would be a useful tool for police.

In response to concerns from some other councilmembers, Pinto also added language to the bill that would force MPD to come up with protocols to make sure people seeking medical or social services near a drug-free zone wouldn’t be discouraged from doing so.

Is it possible any components of the law could be challenged in court?

D.C.’s Office of the Attorney General has reviewed the bill and declared it legally sufficient, and D.C. Council chair Phil Mendelson says that means “in terms of constitutional grounds, the council can be relatively comfortable.”

But it could certainly face court challenges.

“We pass legislation that gets taken to court all the time,” Mendelson told reporters at a recent press conference. “We try to craft it with an eye on whether it could withstand a judicial challenge, and that’s what Councilmember Pinto has tried to do here.”

How can I let my councilmember know how I feel about the bill? 

You can get in touch with them! Their emails and phone numbers are all public, on the council’s website.

This story was corrected to clarify that the version of Secure DC that was most recently amended would not have allowed law enforcement to enter someone’s DNA evidence into a national database until after they have been charged wtih certain crimes or after a judge has determined there was probable cause to arrest them.

The post Your Questions About The Massive D.C. Crime Bill, Answered appeared first on DCist.