"'There'll probably be a lot of shoplifting going on. They'll need a lot of security,' Terriea Sutton, 35, said.

Brenda Speaks, a Ward 4 ANC commissioner, actually urged blocking construction of the planned store in her ward at Georgia and Missouri avenues NW partly because of that risk. Addressing a small, anti-Wal-Mart rally at City Hall on Monday, Speaks said young people would get criminal records when they couldn't resist the temptation to steal."

Seriously, there are many other angles to critique Wal-Mart.

*hat tip to my sometimes sparring partner on Twitter–Chuck Thies.

What is it about firetrucks and District politics?

If you happened to mosey on by the antique firetruck parked outside the Palisades Park recreation center on July 4, you might have gotten the sense that Ward 3 Councilmember Mary Cheh has come out in support of D.C. Council Chairman Vincent Gray’s mayoral bid over incumbent Adrian Fenty. Following the annual Palisades Citizens Association July 4 parade, Gray supporters on the firetruck in question chanted "Vote Vince Gray! Vote Mary Cheh!" and other rhyming variations involving their last names.

Not so fast, Cheh tells City Desk.

"It didn’t come from me… My position is one of neutrality," says Cheh, who has said she’s not taking sides in the September Democratic primary—but will be voting for someone whose name ends in "y." (Sorry, Leo Alexander!)

So what gives? Both Gray and Cheh have drawn the support of the union representing D.C. firefighters, which, according to Cheh, had wanted to show joint-support for both candidates during the parade. But Cheh—who is running unopposed in the Democratic primary and is set to face Republican Dave Hedgepeth in November—felt uncomfortable with the Gray-Cheh coupling. "I did not want the co-mingling," Cheh said.

So any joint Gray-Cheh chants that were uttered were not authorized by her camp. As Mike DeBonis recently noted, Cheh is "walking a political tightrope: She has to appease the local party faithful, who are backing Gray, while trying to avoid alienating Ward 3 residents fond of Fenty—or more to the point, Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee."

File photo by Darrow Montgomery

Must watch commentary from Kojo. Is Fenty anti-poor people? Or is Kojo right that the anti-Fenty anger is a little over the top?

My two cents: When you spend $400,000 on a dog park while D.C. General's emergency shelter is overcrowded, a case can be made that Fenty's priorities lean a little in the anti-poor people column. When your proposed budget leans heavily on cuts to social services—including big-time layoffs at CFSA and proposed cuts to foster parent stipends and emergency housing funds—while the only time you step out into the public eye is to attend ribbon cuttings, a case can be made you don't care about poor people. When homeless men are stuck living in trailers and homeless families have to stay in motels while your AG Peter Nickles stonewalls wastefully on class-action cases and suing special-education plaintiffs attorneys, you may be perceived as anti-poor people. When the head of the Department of Human Services is a former Bushie, you may be perceived as anti-poor people.

And finally, when the District's unemployment rate hovers between 11 and 10 percent, and you say next to nothing on jobs, you may be perceived as anti-poor people. We know more about Fenty's abs than his thoughts on job creation. Tell me, what has Fenty done or said on the unemployment issue?

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT—"Strasburg Arrives: Let the Gouging Begin!," "D.C. Schools Now Model For West Virginia," "Fenty Booed At Dunbar Commencement," "How The Gun Lobby Shot Down D.C.'s Congressional Vote"

Howdy. Good thing Mayor Adrian Fenty has never given a speech about transparency and/or accountability in front of a roomful of reporters and government watchdogs. Then he may have heard some really sustained boos. The Examiner's Alan Suderman reports that during Monday's hearing on Councilmember Mary Cheh's open-government initiative: "Many speakers complained that routine requests for information were often ignored or improperly denied by city departments. Those kind of complaints are nothing new and aren't unique to the District. But the District's problems, Cheh and other speakers said, have only gotten worse under the administration of Mayor Adrian Fenty, who rose to power on a platform of accountability. The average number of Freedom of Information Act requests wholly denied by the city has quadrupled under Fenty, while the average number of requests has stayed constant to previous administrations, according to figures from Cheh's office. But Attorney General Peter Nickles said in a memo that records requests are becoming more complex as city resources to answer them are shrinking. He's asking the Council to approve legislation that would allow the city to extend the deadline for answering requests beyond the now-mandated 25 days." [emphasis added].

AFTER THE JUMP—Rhee faces probe, Fenty gets booed for real, more problems for DYRS, Helen Thomas retires, and much, much more!

D.C. School's Chancellor Michelle Rhee is facing a probe by the D.C. Office of Campaign Finance. WaPo's Bill Turque reports that the compliant alleges "that Rhee violated the law by soliciting donations from private foundations that reserved the right to pull their funding if there was a change in the school system's leadership. Cecily E. Collier-Montgomery, the office's director, told Robert V. Brannum on Friday, in response to his complaint, that there was 'reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred' and that 'a full investigation is warranted in this matter.' Collier-Montgomery's finding was first reported over the weekend by WTTG (Channel 5). Rhee raised $64.5 million from four private foundations (Broad, Walton, Robertson and Arnold) to underwrite pay raises and performance bonuses under the new contract ratified last week by the Washington Teachers' Union. The foundations, which have donated hundreds of millions of dollars to education initiatives across the country, stipulated in letters that they reserved the right to review their commitments if there was a "material change" in the D.C. school system's leadership. Brannum, president of the D.C. Federation of Civic Associations and a supporter of D.C. Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray's mayoral campaign, alleges that Rhee contrived to protect her job by accepting the leadership clause as a condition of the private funding — constituting a direct personal financial benefit. In a statement Monday, Rhee spokeswoman Jennifer Calloway said the allegation is without merit. 'The chancellor did not seek that condition and in fact wanted unconditional funding. She had no role or choice in the conditions the funders decided to impose,' Calloway said."

WAPO EDIT BOARD calls BS on the Rhee probe (which Jonetta Rose Barras did in the Examiner yesterday): "IN ANY OTHER city, an official who manages to raise millions of dollars from credible organizations to improve public schools would get a commendation. Not so in the District of Columbia, where the reward for such effort is a suggestion of wrongdoing. Equally incredible is that officials in the city's Office of Campaign Finance are actually investigating these half-baked allegations against Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee. Let's hope reality sets in before there is real harm to education reform. Ms. Rhee has been put on notice that she is being investigated in connection with the solicitation of private foundation grants to help fund the new teacher contract. Four nonprofit groups have pledged $64.5 million to help underwrite raises and bonuses for D.C. teachers; as is standard in such donations, the donors have conditioned the money on consistency in leadership and the reform agenda. That, though, constitutes a conflict of interest to Robert Vinson Brannum, a civic activist and fierce critic of Ms. Rhee and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D), who brought the June 2 complaint. It's hard to think that anyone could conclude that Ms. Rhee sought these monies to ensure her continued employ as schools chancellor. Nonetheless, the Office of Campaign Finance concluded there may be 'reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred,' and it warned Ms. Rhee of the possible need for 'subpoena, depositions, interrogatories, interviews and audits.'"

NOW IT'S NINE: The Examiner's Bill Myers reports that at least nine District wards have been charged with murder: "Last week, authorities charged 16-year-old Javon Hale with murder in the May 28 shooting death of day laborer Manuel Sanchez. Hale had been committed to the custody of the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services and was out from a private group home on a weekend pass, a source with knowledge of his background told The Washington Examiner. Hale is at least the ninth juvenile ward to have been charged with murder since the beginning of the year. His juvenile history was first reported by Washington Post columnist Colbert King. Another city ward, 17-year-old Durand Lucas, was killed Saturday, shot down in the wee hours in Anacostia. He is at least the third juvenile offender to have been killed this year while in city custody."

FENTY BOOED AT DUNBAR COMMENCEMENT: WJLA has the video and the story on Fenty's rough moment just before giving the commencement address at Dunbar. But were politics at play? Vincent Gray thinks so. WJLA reports: "Both Mayor Fenty and Council Chairman Vincent Gray appeared at the event. Gray said he had initially been invited to deliver the commencement address, but was told a few weeks ago that he would only deliver welcoming remarks. Gray, a Dunbar graduate who is challenging Fenty in the September Democratic mayoral primary, suspects politics determined who actually spoke. His spokesperson, Doxie McCoy, says she believes Gray's initial invite came from a panel of students and teachers. "I received some indication a number of weeks ago that the students and people associated with the school would like to have me as the commencement speaker," Gray told ABC 7 News. Some students concur. They wanted Gray, less for his politics than his history. 'I did cause he was a graduate of Dunbar Senior High School,' said Dunbar grad Monica Matthews." Key quotes: "The confusion about the top speaking slot led to some speculation. 'I don't know,' Gray said. 'I guess these decisions are made by the Chancellor and the Mayor. I don't know.' As for Mayor Fenty: 'I didn't even know there was an issue about the speaker. I'm sorry if there is an issue because the day belongs to the kids.'" More coverage via D.C. Wire, DeBonis.

DISTRICT MAY BE RUNNING SOUTHEAST HOSPITAL: D.C. Wire's Tim Craig reports that "The District will auction off the United Medical Center property in Southeast Washington next month unless an agreement can be reached with the current owner, Specialty Hospitals of America, over how best to salvage the troubled facility. Attorney General Peter Nickles filed a foreclosure notice last week stating that the auction would be held July 9 on the steps of the John A. Wilson Building. Nickles has accused Specialty of defaulting on its lease by failing to pay its bills on time. The city is in talks with attorneys for Specialty to try to reach an agreement, but Nickles said the foreclosure notice was needed to set "an end date" for the talks. If an agreement is not reached, Nickles said, the city will seize the 17-acre United Medical Center property at the auction and operate it as a city-run hospital until a new owner can be found."

METRO MESS: Yesterday, a 10-car train was put on the Green Line thus violating Metro's mandated 8-car train limit. WTOP reports: "The problem? Metro trains are supposed to be a maximum of eight cars — so two cars were stuck in the tunnel while the train pulled into the station. No one was able to get on those last two cars. The long train made it through eight stations before it was finally taken out of service at the Waterfront station. Metro's Steven Taubenkibel says a station manager contacted the Command Center to report the long train. Metro has removed five employees from service while an investigation takes place. The Tri-State Oversight Committee has been notified. This isn't the first time a 10-car train has made its way onto the Green Line. Last August, a 10-car train left the Greenbelt Station and was in service for about 20 minutes before a passenger alerted the train operator about the long train."

FENTY MAILING: Have you received your Fenty campaign pamphlet? D.C. Wire's Nikita Stewart reports that a Fenty media blitz is underway: "Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, who hit black radio stations with a go-go advertising campaign Memorial Day weekend, has now sent voters what appears to be his first mass mailing. The campaign literature boasts that Fenty is 'getting results' and 'getting things done.' It appears to embrace Fenty's reputation for being arrogant and for not working with other elected officials — an approach that his advisers are hoping will put a positive spin on that image and will register with voters. In large type inside, it reads, 'If it weren't for Mayor Fenty's leadership ... we'd still be waiting for' the modernization of schools, development and recreation centers and playgrounds." Meanwhile, Gray is endorsed by Alice Rivlin, who headed up the financial control board.

SHARON PRATT WELCOMES BEING RELEVANT AGAIN: WaPo's Mike DeBonis interviewed the former mayor at a Gray fundraiser over the weekend. She seemed more than ready to defend Gray's work in her administration: ''That's a debate we can win,' Pratt said Sunday evening at a Gray fundraiser. 'That's a debate that Vince can win hands down.' The Department of Human Services in Gray's directorial days encompassed myriad social programs totaling more than $1 billion in yearly spending — one-third of the city budget at the time. What was once under Gray's purview is now split between not only the human services department, but the Department of Health, the Department of Health Care Finance, the Department on Disability Services, the Child and Family Services Agency, and the Department of Mental Health, among other agencies. The ex-mayor — who entered office as Sharon Pratt Dixon, left office as Sharon Pratt Kelly, and now, in business as a consultant, is simply Sharon Pratt — says that in spite of the fiscal challenges Fenty alluded to, she and Gray can boast a record of reform. 'We were out there early on providing disposable needles and condoms, and we were able to stem the tide of HIV/AIDS,' Pratt said. 'We brought that infant mortality rate down, that was under Vince's leadership. We had terrific prenatal care programs, and we dealt with a whole lot of the ongoing issues that we inherited in a compressed period of time....There's almost not an issue that ultimately that we didn't address. That was Vince.'"

HECHT'S WAREHOUSE is still in limbo as a judge stalls the New York Ave NE building's foreclosure proceedings.

CARJACKING: NC8 has a follow-up on the retired cop's carjacking over the weekend. Apparently, the cop returned fire on his assailants. Is that legal?

CHIEF RAMSEY: Ex-D.C. Police Chief Charles Ramsey still doesn't like D.C. Police Union chief Kristopher Baumann. He called him a bad name in a Philly newspaper. WaPo's Mike DeBonis reports: "Old animosities were rekindled in a Philadelphia Daily News story published today on the high legal and back-pay bills exacted by police officers fired by Ramsey, now in charge of the Philly police, and subsequently reinstated. Reporter David Gambacorta consulted D.C. police union chief Kristopher Baumann, who drew on his many years of watchdogging the Ramsey-led Metropolitan Police Department in offering this assessment: 'It's not that hard to fire a police officer. What Ramsey cannot do is fire them appropriately.' The top cop's retort: 'He's a [expletive], and I don't care if you quote me on that.'"

BWI: WAMU reports that full-body scans are coming to BWI.

HELEN THOMAS: Yesterday, the long-time reporter and headache to multiple presidents and press secretaries retired over her stupid anti-Israel remarks. Dana Milbank writes: "It was a sad end to a storied career. You'll find no defense here of her anti-Semitic suggestion that Jews should 'get the hell out of Palestine' and 'go home' to Poland and Germany — where they were slaughtered by the millions. There's no excuse for that, and Thomas deserved what she got. Yet the White House press corps will be diminished without Helen front and center, and not only because she was in that job before the current president was born. She brought a ferocity to her questioning that has eluded too many in subsequent generations. At a time when others were getting cozy with sources, her crabby, unrelenting hostility was refreshing. 'When are you going to get out of Afghanistan?' she challenged President Obama two weeks ago. 'Why are we continuing to kill and die there? What is the real excuse? And don't give us this Bushism, 'If we don't go there, they'll all come here.''"

MAYOR'S SCHEDULE:

3:00 p.m. Remarks
Personnel Announcement
Location: 825 North Capitol Street, NE

City Paper’s Unsolicited Political Advice of the Week

The candidate: Vincent Gray, mayoral hopeful

The challenge: Your opponent is trying to tie you to the early 1990s, one of the most ignominious periods in modern D.C. history, when you served in the failed administration of Mayor Sharon Pratt. Expect this to be a recurring theme his attacks. In an interview with City Desk, your spokesperson Traci Hughes assures that you will "lay out point-by-point how Mayor Fenty is presenting falsehoods in an effort to win reelection."

But that just might not be good enough. So here we present some suggested talking points:

-The biographical solution: “Early ‘90s? At my age, I’m more about the early ‘60s!”

-Turn the critique into a compliment: “So my former boss lost the Redskins. Big deal! Thanks to us, D.C. doesn’t have to call itself the home to Daniel Snyder!”

-Accuse the accuser: “I’m early ‘90s? Hey, Fenty is the guy who’s always doing the Running Man!”

-Go wonky: “It seems to me that the early ‘90s were known for a mayor who let the budget get out of control. Look in the mirror, Adrian!”

-If things really get desperate: If you really are good friends with your former patron, surely you can pick up the phone and ask Pratt to do you one little favor: Endorse Fenty!

*Michael Schaffer contributed to this blog post.

*photo courtesy of People Magazine.

So how many humans will it take to form a complete "human safety net" around city hall?

"We've calculated that it is 900 feet around the Wilson building, so with people and banners and nets we expect 200 people will wrap it up nicely," Podschun replied.

What would you say to Jack Evans and Vince Gray to get them to join your human chain? Podschun wrote:

"Jack Evans is just not going to be convinced on this issue. I don't know if he truly believes the preposterous notion that wealthy people will leave rather than pay a few hundred dollars more, but nobody else we've talked to believes it, even the people who object to our proposal because they think the Government should eliminate all waste before raising taxes. The latter is not a position we find to be especially reasonable or moral, but at least it has some sort of logic to it.

Vince Gray has worked in social services for most of his career — he has arguably done as much for our safety net as anyone on Council. In his campaign speeches, he likes to tout the revenue-generating measures that Council took last year — the cigarette and sales tax increases, which all disproportionately affected low- and middle-income DC residents. Here we're proposing to rescue the damaged safety net in a truly progressive way. This would hardly pinch a small portion of DC's population, but it's a major opportunity to demonstrate the leadership that Gray likes to say that DC needs."

How did you decide on a human safety net? Podschun wrote:

"We all benefit from a strong safety net, whether or not we use these services. This action features DC residents from all walks of life and all corners of the city, joining together to form a safety net around the building. It also creates a beautiful demonstration that Councilmembers can't avoid as they arrive for their meetings on the budget. Our city has some of the worst income disparity in the country, and reversing that begins here. So we'll join together to call upon Councilmembers to be smart, responsible, and courageous."

Today, Vincent Orange formally announced he will be running for D.C. Council Chair. From the D.C. Wire:

"Orange said chairman Vincent C. Gray's decision to run for mayor has created a leadership void and that he has the experience to fill it. He also questioned how his Democratic rival, at-large council member Kwame R. Brown, would be able to work with Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, with whom he has clashed."

A lot has changed since Orange left the D.C. Council: the mayor's school takeover, the rise of the  Scary-Troll known as Peter Nickles, and the passage of the same-sex marriage bill. It's that last change that may haunt Orange as he heads back out on the campaign trail.

When Orange ran his losing campaign for mayor in 2006, he came out against gay marriage. In an interview he gave with Fox-5, cited in a Metro Weekly piece, Orange was very clear about where he stood:

''I am the only one [of the mayoral candidates] that is opposed to same-sex marriage. The other four, they say they believe in God, they go to church, but they're also for same-sex marriage.... I don't think they're morally fit to run this city.''

WaPo had more from Orange on the subject: "If you believe in God, the Bible says be fruitful and multiply," he said. "I'm saying same-sex marriage is not condoned by the Bible."

Linda Greene, Orange's spokesperson, says that his position has changed—he is now in favor of same-sex marriage. Orange is expected to call City Desk with further comment. We will add his comments as soon as we get him on the phone

Update 8 p.m.: Orange released a statement on gay marriage:

"My record on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender affairs has been well documented. During my tenure on the DC Council and as Chairman of the Committee on Government Affairs, I championed along with DC Councilmember Jim Graham Bill 16-235, the Office of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Affairs Act of 2005. This Bill was in honor of my good friend Wanda R. Alston and to permanently establish the office without fear of it being abolished by subsequent administrations.

Councilmember Jim Graham and I also introduced the “District of Columbia Human Rights Act Clarification Act of 2005” to amend the District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977 to add “gender identity or expression” to the list of already enumerated classes protected by current District law. This Act was important because it clarified that discrimination against transgender and gender variant people is illegal in the District of Columbia.

Early in my tenure with Pepco commencing in 2007, Rick Rosendall, I believe, brought to my attention during DC Council hearings that Pepco did not provide benefits to domestic partners or civil unions. I immediately had this change and benefits were provided.

My record is clear, I stand for positive deeds, scholarship and love for all persons, genders and sexual preferences.

The District of Columbia recently passed same-sex marriage legislation. As the Democratic National Committeeman, I supported this legislation and voted in favor of the resolution passed by the DC Democratic State Committee. In fact, I challenged anyone to produce any legislation addressing civil rights where I opposed it.

In 2006, I did say that I believed that marriage is between a man and a woman. In 2010, I supported the same-sex legislation and as stated above voted in favor of the resolution passed by the DC Democratic State Committee.
We have come a long way in the journey of life. Today, I stand on the right side of history."

"I am a different kind of council member. I ran to get resources, to uplift people of Ward 8 to do everything I can to empower them."–Councilmember Marion S. Barry Jr. on the dais yesterday in response to Robert Bennett's testimony.

By resources, Barry means the thousands of dollars in city funds he funneled to a set of fishy nonprofits. By "people of Ward 8," Barry means his campaign supporters and love interest.

As the Bennett Report lays out in detail, Barry's nonprofits enriched few outside of his inner circle. At best, they provide a blueprint for how nonprofits should not be run.

Blueprint after the jump!

Bennett's investigation did some serious digging into the financial records of the six nonprofits—Clean and Green, Inc., Clean and Sober, Inc., Education Council, Inc., Health Council Inc., Workforce Development Council, Inc., and the Youth Leadership Council, Inc.—conceived by Barry. They found:

*60 percent of the six nonprofits' budget went to administrative salaries.

*8.65 percent went to the fiscal agents.

*$23,885 was spent on office supplies and telephones

*$3,091 was spent on postage.

*$35,376 was spent on marketing and promotion materials.

*$13,589  was spent on catering.

*14.1 percent of the total budgets fell under "miscellaneous."

So what's the takeaway?

Only really bad nonprofits devote 60 percent of their budget to salaries. And despite all this money spent on food and promotions, hardly anyone we talked to in Ward 8 over the summer had heard of these nonprofits.

In response to a Freedom of Information Act Request, Washington City Paper obtained documents on the day-to-day business of the nonprofits. The documents provide some insight into just how these organizations function and how wide a net they cast.

One meeting of the Ward 8 Health Council is indicative of the groups' outreach problems. According to a memo detailing the minutes of  the Jan. 16, 2009, Health Council meeting, interested parties lamented its poor attendance. During one discussion, individuals "agreed to make a concerted effort to get at least 25 citizens to the table" for its February meeting.

Those listed on the Ward 8 Health Council's contact list included a woman who had quit the organization and former Barry girlfriend Donna Watts-Brighthaupt.

Among the food expenses on behalf of the Ward 8 Health Council: an invoice for $250.00 for "juices," "veg. soup" and "weightloss + nutrition juices." It is unclear from the invoice whether this cost included more than just juices and soup.

In April 2009, the Ward 8 Health Council spent $1,238.75 for T-shirts and brochures.

The Bennett Report states the operations of the nonprofits were managed mainly out of Barry's constituent services office. At best, the work of some of the nonprofits went incomplete. The agendas of some of the nonprofits were typed up on Barry letterhead—evidence, perhaps, that the nonprofit managers were serious about keeping expenses low.

The Bennett findings zeroed in on the woman Barry tapped to oversee the nonprofits—Brenda Richardson. She raked in more than $100,000 for work that the report characterizes as follows: "Ms. Richardson was in charge of quality control for the councils, selected various vendors utilized by the councils, and regularly reported to Council Member Barry regarding the councils."

The Bennett team found a very legal way of saying that Richardson was overpaid:

"Ms. Richardson submitted invoices for payment to the councils reflecting that she worked fewer hours than she was committed to work, but she was nonetheless paid the full amounts under the contract for the pertinent pay period."

Richardson was supposed to work 20 hours per week for each council. But according to the invoices she submitted, she worked 10 hours per week. Yet her paychecks overlooked the invoices, paying her for the full 20 hours per week. Richardson held this arrangement with three of the nonprofit organizations, meaning that she was compensated for 60 hours of work per week, or one-and-a-half employees. "These invoices were not questioned by the fiscal agents or the agencies monitoring each grant," the report states.

In his deposition, Barry called Richardson his "accountability officer."

Since pretty much everyone has the day off except journalists, the downtime has been enormous.  I got lunch (a first in a long time). I paid off a cellphone bill and changed my cellphone plan. I even faxed some healthcare paperwork to a lab that was a week late. And I talked for a good while with an old college buddy. But I also got to thinking about the District's own recent civil rights victories.

The biggies that come to mind are the D.C. Council's passing of the gay-marriage bill. And the settlements that have come out of the protester cases. Both the Becker and the Barham cases awarded historic sums and legit reforms concerning police tactics. The Pearl Beale case also was rightfully lauded for its own historic settlement over the death of a D.C. Jail inmate.

What do you think were our biggest civil rights victories in recent years? Cathy Lanier becoming police chief?  Getting rid of the control board? Gay marriage? Pershing Park?

*file photo by Darrow Montgomery.

Today, the Washington Post published a nice little good news story about how the District's population is starting rebound and is expected to pass 600,000 residents for the first time since 1991. Post reporters were able to beef up their story with interviews from Councilmembers Jack Evans, Jim Graham, and Kwame Brown, a demographer at the Brookings Institute, the director of the District's planning office, and the head of the 21st Century School Fund.

So who refused to talk about this milestone? Mayor Fenty. He told the Post reporters that he wouldn't comment on the population increases until his press conference scheduled for late this morning.

The Post added his quote to the online addition moments ago. This is the boilerplate the reporters had to wait for:

"These gains reflect a significant vote of confidence that the District of Columbia is moving in the right direction," Fenty (D) said. "This kind of growth will only continue as more people see how we are working to improve our schools, provide more transportation options and build healthier, safer, more vibrant neighborhoods."

*photo by Darrow Montgomery.

In this morning's hearing in U.S. District Court, Judge Emmet Sullivan edged ever closer to referring the Pershing Park case to the Department of Justice—signaling he's close to handing the matter over to Attorney General Eric Holder.

But first, Sullivan wants to order up one more investigative tool at his disposal: some serious tech support.

Following up on the recommendations in the Sporkin Report, Sullivan ordered that he would hire a forensic examiner to investigate the missing and/or destroyed evidence in the case. He added that the examiner would be selected based on recommendations from both parties and would be paid for by the District.

It was unclear whether the forensic examiner would study both the missing running resume issue and the gaps in the radio tapes from the mass arrests in Pershing Park on Sept. 27, 2002.

"I think it should be someone appointed at the discretion of the court," Sullivan stated. "And the city is going to pay for it."

In the days leading up to the hearing, tensions had see-sawed among the parties. Two days ago, an $8.25 million settlement was reached between the 400 or so plaintiffs in the Barham case and the Office of the Attorney General. But settlement talks in the remaining case, the Chang case, appeared to have stalled.

AG Peter Nickles submitted several filings late last night. In one, he filed a motion to halt all depositions.

Before Judge Sullivan, Nickles played up his pro-bono days when he was the one battling government corruption; he clearly hates the fact that he's now seen as the bad guy. At least twice, he stressed that his reputation is on the line.

"I'm not trying to hide anything," Nickles insisted, later telling Judge Sullivan, "I'm trying to clear the air here. You're the boss."

To which Sullivan replied: "That's exactly right. And we're clear about that."

And the Boss still wants answers to the mystery of what happened to the running resume and the radio tapes. In addition to the hiring of the forensic examiner, Sullivan made other decisions critical to this fact-finding mission.

Sullivan denied Nickles' attempt to halt depositions. At the request of the U.S. Park Police attorney, he granted that defense lawyers could depose a key witness, Det. Paul Hustler, who had testified in an affidavit that he heard Chief Charles Ramsey give the arrest order in Pershing Park.

Changing his stance from last night's filings and his recent protective order requests, Nickles suddenly warmed to the idea of more depositions. "Discovery can go on forever," he told Sullivan.

Sullivan moved up the trial to date a month–to September 2010. Chang plaintiffs attorney Jonathan Turley said he would be ready to go to trial.

Sullivan also made clear that no settlement would prevent sanctions in the case nor would it prevent him from referring the matter to criminal authorities.

Sullivan spent serious time questioning lawyers about whether he should go ahead and refer the matter to Holder. Barham plaintiffs attorney Mara Verheyden-Hilliard said it was time. Turley agreed and argued that the criminal investigation would not interrupt the civil proceedings in his case.

Nickles told Sullivan that he believed the forensics examiner should do their work first before any referrals were made. "I think it's better to have more knowledge," Nickles argued.

Sullivan agreed to wait to see what the forensics examiner finds.

No matter what happens, Turley is itching for a trial. He told Sullivan that despite all the publicity the case has generated, a new law from the D.C. Council and millions in settlement money, one recently deposed cop—Officer Michael Smith—testified that he thinks he did nothing wrong that day in Pershing Park and would do it all over again.

"We're going to fight vigorously to get these witnesses and this evidence before a federal jury," Turley said after the hearing.

*photo by Darrow Montgomery.

*follow me on Twitter.

On September 27, 2002, D.C. Police surrounded some 400 individuals in Pershing Park. Those individuals were rounded up without warning, arrested, and transferred to the police academy where they were hogtied for hours [See our Boss Hogtie cover story on the incident].

Sally Norton, a nurse in town for a conference at the nearby Marriott, had decided to check out the activity in the park on her walk back from breakfast with a colleague.

"It all looked very peaceful," she tells City Desk today. "We had about 10 minutes before the conference started. We went to leave...by then they had formed a perimeter and they wouldn’t let us leave. We pointed out that we are right here at the Marriott;  it didn’t matter. We tried about six or seven other places. Please let us leave. They either said we couldn’t leave or they didn’t speak to us."

Norton would be arrested and detained for 12 hours. John Passacantando, 48, says on that morning he had wandered into the park to perhaps catch a speaker or listen to some music. He ended up being arrested and hogtied—cuffed right wrist to left ankle—on a gym mat for 17 hours.

"This was literally for being in the park," Passacantando recalls. "I swore to myself that when I got out of there I would find the best lawyers in the land and do everything I could to make sure this didn’t happen to anyone else.... It was my duty to fight back."

Passacantando, Norton, and hundreds of other citizens sought out the Partnership for Civil Justice, a local law firm that specializes in civil rights cases. Today, after more than seven years of  litigation, the plaintiffs announced a settlement which includes an $8.25 million District payout and a series of stipulations concerning evidence storage that the Office of Attorney General must follow.

Norton and Passcantando say they are pleased with their case's resolution.

"I think good police officers see this all over the country and say, 'yeah we get it,'" Passacantando says. "D.C. made a big mistake that day."

Even in the moments after the arrest order was given, police officers questioned whether they were lawful. In a subsequent police investigation, U.S. Park Police Captain Rick Murphy stated that he told one police official "that he would not arrest the protesters in the park as their conduct did not meet the criteria for mass arrests."

After the arrests, District lawyers refused to prosecute a single case stemming from Pershing Park.

Within the next two years, the D.C. Council investigated Pershing Park and released their own scathing assessment. The Council concluded that then-Chief Charles Ramsey had lied, and police officials had engaged in a cover-up of the incident [PDF].

Eventually, the case became all about the cover up. A federal judge would slam the the Office of the Attorney General and the D.C. Police Department's general counsel for withholding thousands of pages of discovery documents. The police department's running resume, a moment-by-moment chronicling of police activity on Sept. 27, went missing. Radio dispatches turned over to plaintiffs contained mysterious gaps.

Through it all, the plaintiffs say they remained committed to seeing the case to a favorable conclusion.

“I wanted to know... that we extracted as much change as possible, that there really was going to be a price to pay for a police force to ever do this again," Passacantando says. "I feel like that’s what we accomplished.”

Norton, who is an associate professor of nursing at the University of Rochester, monitored the case online. She says the department's conduct in the case shocked her. “How do you systematically destroy all the running resumes? How do they all get lost? For them to sort of say first there was no record and then oh, we lost it, there’s no explanation for that," Norton says.

Those questions remain active and may be resolved with the one remaining Pershing Park case still active in federal court.

Looking back on the seven years since Pershing Park, Norton says the has experienced changed her.

“I have a lot less naivete about the process," Norton says. "I always gave the police the benefit of the doubt and I still do, but it’s not unquestioned anymore because of my experience in Washington, DC. It’s a sorry-ass day when you can’t walk across D.C. from a restaurant without being arrested and hogtied and detained illegally."

*photo by Darrow Montgomery.

In late July, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan called for an investigation into the discovery abuses in the Pershing Park case. Sullivan suggested that the D.C. Council should get to the bottom of how evidence went missing or got botched.

Councilmember Mary Cheh called for AG Peter Nickles to resign. Councilmember Phil Mendelson, who heads the Judiciary Committee, stated that he "definitely" would be considering an investigation into the matter.

Now, a D.C. Council investigation appears unlikely.

Mendelson tells City Desk that he hasn't ruled out holding hearings on the mass arrests and troubling OAG response. But considering Nickles' relationship to the council, he says it might be a waste of time.

"The difficulty with holding a hearing is Nickles may not show," Mendelson says. "He might even claim privilege....I'm not sure what I could get out of a hearing."

Mendelson counters that the bulk of any investigation into the disappearing evidence is already coming from the plaintiffs attorneys. He's just not sure what more he could discover from holding a public hearing on the case. "I just don't know how we could have an effective hearing given Nickles' obstructionism," he explains.

Mendo says he's still trying to get police documents related to the DeOnte Rawlings case. Pershing Park could be another never ending document chase.

Still, Mendo assures: "Pershing Park is not off my radar screen in terms of Nickles' bad behavior. I'm not sure how I'm going to follow up on it....In some way, and I don't know how right now, all that's going to come back to haunt him."

*photo by Darrow Montgomery.