Remember when a certain reformist-minded city administration went around closing stuff?

A group of  fired daycare workers and their union—the American Federation of Government Employees—certainly do. On Tuesday, they filed a $10 million lawsuit against the D.C. government, alleging city officials sabotaged the Department of Parks and Recreation child-care programs they worked for and illegally privatized them, leaving the teachers jobless. The suit also claims $4 million of kid-care funding that could have been used to keep their programs going was "reprogrammed" by officials.

The workers filed a similar suit in federal court about two years ago, but it was moved to D.C. Superior Court for jurisdictional reasons. There, a judge decided that the matter should be taken up by the Office of Employee Appeals, whose administrative judges hear cases involving D.C. employees who want to contest suspensions, demotions, or terminations. One thing that's new about this most recent suit is that it calls the OEA out.

That's where things went off track, according to the suit. The OEA has let the case sit idle for 18 months even though D.C. law requires the agency to address appeals within 120 days, so the workers' attorney, civil rights lawyer Donald Temple, is going back to U.S. District Court.

There, he says, he'll argue that D.C. has now violated his clients' "due process rights" a "federal question" a federal judge should have no problem speaking to.

The workers beef with the D.C. government dates back to April 2009, when then-Mayor Adrian Fenty eliminated DPR daycare services for low-income families because of "underenrollment" and a funding shortfall, deftly handing the responsibility over to United Planning Organization. That was despite emergency council legislation that required Fenty to do a fiscal impact analysis before making a move. He didn't, hence the purported illegality.

The plaintiffs contend that low enrollment and funding problem were the result of a set up: DPR functionaries instructed centers not to accept applications from new families in 2008, so the centers ended up with too few students in 2009. They also cut $4 million dollars of funding from the budget for the centers, leaving it with a $2 million bankroll too small to cover operating costs, says the suit. That allegedly made the centers look unstable. Court papers say it's a mystery as to where the siphoned money went:

According to the Council’s Budget Director, “it appears that Clark Ray (“Ray”), the former Director of DPR and Deborah Gist (“Gist”), then State Superintendent, absent legal authority, agreed to reduce the MOU from $6.2 to $4.5, contrary to the budget approved by the Council and Congress.” To date, Plaintiffs do not know what happened to the $1.7 million dollars which Defendant reallocated. Said reallocation violated existing law which would have required City Council approval. The Council “subsequently learned that the budget for the child care subsidy was reduced again by [Defendant] at some later point, to $2.5 million” according to Goulet, a second illegal act. To date, Plaintiffs do not know what happened to the approximate $4 million dollars which Defendant illegally reallocated.

Office of Attorney General spokesperson Ariel Levinson-Waldman says his office "is reviewing the complaint" and will get back to City Desk with any further comments.

Though a hearing hasn't been scheduled yet, Temple says his clients will soon have their day in court, but emphasizes that's no thanks to the OEA. In a press release, Temple says that OEA, which has had trouble with backlogs in the past, "sentences fired workers to a legal purgatory and condones the District’s illegal terminations." Over the phone, he's even more harsh. "OEA is an illusion," says Temple. "It does nothing." A spokesperson for OEA declined comment.

Photo by Darrow Montgomery

I'll Change, I Promise: Mayor Adrian Fenty finally gets around to admitting that the main obstacle holding him back in his bid for re-election is... Mayor Adrian Fenty. In a debate televised on NewsChannel 8 TBD TV, the incumbent promised to "change some things" and "listen better" if voters opt to give him a second term instead of replacing him with D.C. Council Chairman Vincent Gray. The debate was interrupted frequently by commercial breaks, most of which featured Fenty ads. If you missed it, don't worry; at this point, the candidates debate two or three times a day, so chances are they'll be bringing their traveling road show to your front porch soon. +2

Fancy An Evening Swim?: It took 51 days of 90-plus temperatures, but finally, the silver lining in this ridiculous summer has revealed itself. Ten District pools will stay open late today to help residents try to cool off. This being D.C., there's no official closing time; pools will shut down "later, depending on the availability of lighting," per the Department of Parks and Recreation. Bring a flashlight and a bathing suit, and maybe you can stay all night. +3

Busboys & Poets Expanding—To Harlem: Today U Street and Mt. Vernon Square, tomorrow the world! The popular bookstore/café/restaurant bucks the usual flow, in which New York hotspots spread to other cities, by planning to plant an outpost in Manhattan. (The normal order was restored with the news that New York-based burger mecca Shake Shack would open south of Dupont Circle.) Eat your heart out, Frank Rich. +3

Bike Like A Salmon: New "contraflow" bike lanes opened this morning on New Hampshire Avenue NW, letting cyclists ride against traffic for the two blocks the street runs one-way north near U Street. A slightly convoluted set of signals, street markings and other fun new gizmos are also up. The contraflow pattern is similar to a bike lane recently installed running south on 15th Street NW, which runs one-way north. Cue the inevitable outcry from drivers upset that a few inches of street pavement have been reserved for other uses in 3, 2, 1... +4

Yesterday's Needle rating: 31 Today's score: 12 Today's Needle rating: 43

Where a bench once stood in Turtle Park

Mary Wright, an ANC commissioner in 6B, has been trying to solve a crime. For some time now, she's been attempting to find out who stole benches from a tiny triangular patch of green located across the street from Eastern Market. "To my recollection, there were six," she says of the missing seating. Wright says the benches have been gone from the place known as Turtle Park for about a year.

Her top suspects aren't the kind Capitol Hillers are used to blaming, like the "loitering" juveniles ostensibly well-meaning neighbors rant about via listserv. No, Wright's suspects happen to be the well-meaning neighbors themselves.

"Neighbors around the area told me some other neighbors took the benches," she says.

And why would concerned citizens steal stuff from public land? To make it better, of course. Wright believes someone swiped the outdoor furniture in hopes of ridding the park of the homeless people who sometimes snooze on the equipment. Visiting the community, City Desk found others share her theory. (It has some historical roots—there was a similar dispute over alleged nuisance benches in Columbia Heights last year.)

Contacted about the theft, a flustered D.C. Parks and Recreation Department wasn't able to immediately figure out if Turtle Park ever had benches, much less where the missing ones got off to. "DPR will work with MPD and look into the situation," says spokesperson John Stokes. But a resident who earlier inquired to DPR about the benches tells Wright she got this message from the department: "The department does not know what happened to the benches. We did not remove them."

Scott Miller, who lives right around the corner from the park, remembers the benches, and noticed when they went away. No wonder: One of them stood in honor of his father. The bench, installed by his late mother, was placed in the park in 1986. "There was a memorial plaque on the back," Miller remembers.

This isn't the first time the bench went elsewhere. When it was first placed in the park, it vanished into a then-crime-plagued city. At that point, something surprising happened. "There was an outcry in the neighborhood," says Miller. Neighbors put up posters about the hijacked bench and what it meant to them. It worked. "Whoever took it had a guilty conscious or something," says Miller, because they brought it back.

After that, the bench was bolted down, he recalls. For over 20 years, it stood undisturbed. When the bench departed all over again in 2009, Miller was stunned. This time, there was no neighborhood outcry. Like Wright, Miller believes the park's benches were hauled away by his neighbors.

Some neighbors do miss the seating. James Goodwin, who lives two blocks from the oak tree shaded area, liked sitting on the now-vanished equipment. "It's nice over there," he says. Goodwin didn't mind sharing the park with the homeless. Told about rumors of bench-stealing neighborhood vigilantes, Goodwin doesn't have  trouble imagining it. "Pretty typical I guess. People are pretty shallow."

Jesús Aguirre, the new boss of the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), has quite a bit in common with the departing boss, Ximena Hartsock:

1) He's Hispanic;

2) He comes to DPR from a top post in the school system, where he worked as director of school operations; and

3) He's an interim director.

There's more to that third point than meets the eye. When mayors hold press conferences to announce their pick to head an agency, they usually send the name immediately to the D.C. Council for confirmation. Not so in this case, explained Mayor Adrian M. Fenty at a press conference this morning: The administration will wait a while before passing along Aguirre's credentials to the council.

In Fenty's own words: "We will make sure we have exhausted every avenue to make sure the person we submit is the best person for the job."

Odd, huh? Does that mean that the Fenty people don't have confidence in Aguirre? Not necessarily. What it does mean is that the mayor is committed to avoiding a repeat of the nasty showdown that ended with the rejection of Hartsock as the permanent director of the agency.

Hartsock is a Fenty favorite and was hastily placed at the top of DPR in April following the summary dismissal of Clark Ray. The council declined to confirm her appointment in large part because of its frustrations with the whole Fenty way of life—including stonewalling on crucial mayoral-legislative matters and its failure to heed council directives in the recreation realm.

Though Hartsock will no longer be calling the shots at DPR, she has landed a slot as an analyst in the office of the city administrator. Neither Fenty nor City Administrator Neil O. Albert denied that Hartsock is a strong candidate to head up the Children and Youth Investment Trust Corp., a quasi-governmental outfit that partners with both public and private entities to fund youth-related programs.

Reporting by Mike DeBonis

UPDATE, 12:20 P.M.: Some initial thoughts from Ward 5 Councilmember Harry Thomas Jr., who as chair of the parks committee, played the lead role in derailing Hartsock's nomination: "I don't know much about him; I don't know if he has a recreation background."

Thomas did credit Albert with bringing Aguirre by his office this morning, but, like many a frustrated legislator, he felt he should have had a role in the selection process that he's not exactly entitled to. "I wanted them to work with us to find someone with relevant experience" in a "transparent process," Thomas said.

The "recreation background" thing may or may not be a big deal; Thomas made great hay out of Hartsock's "lack of subject matter experience," and Aguirre likewise doesn't have any particular resume items in the field—he's been in education for his entire career. But, says Thomas, "I don't know if it's automatically a deal-breaker," saying he'd credit experience in "budgets, managing people and programs." That Aguirre certainly has done at DCPS, as the guy charged with making the trains run on time.

The fact that Aguirre is in on an interim basis, Thomas says, also gives him succor. He called upon Fenty to conduct a broader search in the coming months in order to get the "best of the best." —Mike DeBonis

Today, the D.C. Wire reported that a five-member council delegation met with Mayor Adrian Fenty last night to discuss the standoff over Ximena Hartsock. A symbol of testy council-mayoral relations, Hartsock is Fenty's choice to helm the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation. Following some discord among the council, Hartsock, and Fenty, however, the council voted against confirming Hartsock. The mayor responded by keeping Hartsock in place.

According to a source familiar with the meeting, the prevailing sentiment among the councilmembers in attendance (Chairman Vincent Gray and councilmembers David Catania, Mary Cheh, Harry Thomas Jr., and Muriel Bowser) was that Hartsock had to go.

Fenty, according to the source, assured that he was looking for her replacement but stressed that the search wasn't an easy one. The meeting ended with a promise: The mayor would replace Hartsock by Dec. 1, the source recalls.

Still, Fenty still couldn't help being Fenty.

At one point in the meeting, Fenty apparently told the councilmembers: "I want you to understand something—anything we agree to will not dictate my actions as mayor."

*photo by Darrow Montgomery.

The Issue: The community is already, um, barking about a dog park that opened last month on 17^th and  S Street. The astroturf park was established by the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and is maintained by the non-profit Circle Dogs DC, which opened it before a set of rules was established. At an Advisory Neighborhood Commission meeting to deal with the canine-related backlash this week, issues raised included: the number of dogs allowed in the park (optimal number was calculated to be 12.2), the distinction between dog toys and tennis balls, and whether humping is an owner-control issue or a reason to keep out un-neutered dogs. But according to Borderstan, the meeting hasn't yet resolved two important questions: Why are children still allowed to play in the park? And who exactly will be dealing with neighbor's complaints in the future? 

Dogs, Dogs, Dogs! The original petition for the dog park states: “We do not believe that dogs are more important than people, but we do believe that dog owners are equal to other park patrons.” On that note, Circle Dogs DC has supported the notion of a “culture of responsibility”—making sure dog-owners (who preferred to be called “guardians”) respect hours, curb barking, etc. The group says that once more people are involved on its board, it shouldn’t be difficult to enforce rules. The park is undoubtedly a success, at least by one measure: ANC 2B commissioner Bob Meehan told City Desk: “Sometimes there are 20 to 30 dogs in the park at one time.”

Rules, Rules, Rules! But neighbors are concerned that dog-owners are failing to self-police, and DC Circle Dogs isn’t big enough (i.e., four volunteer board members) to handle all the issues. This has left DPR National Park Service to pick up the slack—a solution that, as in the case of opening and closing the area, doesn’t always work. Others contend dogs aren’t the real issue, children are. Says Meehan: “Sometimes parents treat it like a petting zoo.” Matt, commenting on Borderstan, adds: “So…it’s just fine for parents to place toddlers on the ground with strange dogs running around in all directions. Have we lost our minds?”

Next Step: ANC 2B passed a resolution this week dealing with the opening/closing hours issue, and there's a proposed meeting in one or two months. In terms of children, “it’s against the rules for dogs to be in children parks. It’s not against the rules for [supervised children] to play with dogs," says Meehan. He adds that, "The [Tuesday meeting] was the first one where dog-owners and neighbors were listening to each other! It was also the most constructive meeting in which nothing was accomplished.”

Photo of park by Jess Erfer, Creative Commons Attribution License