By PETA, our city was crowned
The best place for veggies around
Falafel's delish
But sometimes I wish
That something more bold could be found

Of hope, it seems we have a glimmer
The District weighs in a bit slimmer
So go for it, fatties
Eat bacon-topped patties
But broccoli might keep you trimmer

For ages the District has waited
And these dudes may soon be instated
But Brady is noting
That statues and voting
Are not even slightly related

For those of the scofflaw persuasion
Fuggedabout past tax evasion
You criminals, hardened
Will briefly be pardoned
To bolster the budget equation

City Desk asked two such experts for a rally preview. Here's what they had to say via e-mail:

Patricia Mullahy Fugere, Executive Director of the Washington Legal Clinic For the Homeless:

"Because of the challenging economy, more DC residents are facing poverty and homelessness than ever before. This is exactly NOT the time to be cutting vital safety net programs. The District need not address its own financial woes solely by slashing funding for these important services.There is growing community support for a range of revenue enhancements—including an increase in income tax on the highest income earners—that, if effected, would allow for the safety net to be preserved. Even those who stand to be impacted by such a tax increase are saying 'Tax me more. It's what justice requires of me.' We are calling on the DC Council, as it makes its final decisions on the FY 2011 budget, to do right and do justice."

Robert Egger, founder of DC Central Kitchen:

"Nonprofits aren't just nice–we are necessary. We are one of the biggest employer in DC, and our work sets the stage for businesses to thrive. From now on, we stand together."

For one thing, he and city legislators were faced with a last-minute budget crunch to the tune of $660 million. They were given two weeks to find a solution. Meanwhile, the antics of Ward 8 Councilmember Marion Barry had exposed the sordid practice of earmarking, whereby councilmembers directed taxpayer funds to favorite nonprofits—in Barry's case, nonprofits that he had created and controlled.

Gray came up with a tidy way to address both problems: End all earmarks, cold turkey.

"I don't want to pick and choose because, inevitably, we will be accused of some bias in the process," Gray told the Washington Post at the time. "People are using them as a lifeline." Organizations from across the District showed up at city hall, calling on the council to preserve their lifelines in a marathon hearing, but Gray held his ground—no earmarks survived in the final budget.

Or did they?

The earmark ban, it turns out, was not absolute. At least one councilmember found a way to get money to key nonprofits in his ward through the fiscal 2010 budget. That would be Ward 5's Harry Thomas Jr.

The key legislative language can be found in the budget of the Children and Youth Investment Trust Corp., a quasi-independent nonprofit charged with making grants to qualified service providers, then overseeing those grants. This is what it says: "The budget provides $1,320,000 of designated grants, which includes $1,000,000 for competitive grants to support community-based targeted gang street intervention and outreach and $320,000 for...Ward 5 anti-crime youth violence initiative."

They key word is "competitive." A Ward 6 initiative, for instance, was competitively bid, with $280,000 grant going to the well-regarded Sasha Bruce Youthwork program. Same goes for an even larger chunk of money granted pursuant to the "Blueprint for Action to Counter D.C. Gang and Youth Violence."

The Ward 5 money was doled out through a different method.

At a performance oversight hearing last week, Ward 6 Councilmember Tommy Wells asked Interim CYITC CEO Ellen London about the Ward 5 money and whether it, like the Ward 6 money, had been subject to competition.

Said London: "They were not competitively bid. We met with the Ward 5 councilmember and talked about what he felt would be the best way to serve the community. We talked about a number of organizations that he suggested we look at that he knows have a track record of good services."

Allow LL to translate: Thomas had a key role in choosing which groups got city money. He earmarked funds.

Thomas protests that characterization: "I have no earmarks," says the councilmember. "We made recommendations for groups we know that have done these types of services, and they have to apply like everybody else to that process."

The process for CYTIC grantees is not without rigor: Nonprofits have to be federally registered nonprofit organizations, preferably with a recent financial audit, must be in good standing with the District government, and must submit a work plan and budget narrative to be considered for funding.

Who are these groups and what do they do? According to a list provided by the CYITC, 21 different groups have been identified to receive funds; checks have already been cut to nine of them.

Some of the groups are fairly well-established, and several of them, in fact, have been funded in the past by the CYITC. And many of the groups tapped for the anti-gang money have a sporting focus—keeping with Thomas' well-known jockish tendencies.

The Woodridge Warriors and Washington Chiefs sports teams each got $20,000. And a group called the Falconsedge Male Task Force has received $40,000 in city funds. David Jones, who heads the organization, said the funds went toward the D.C. Falcons, a football team for older youth—kids who had either graduated from high school or had dropped out.

"It gives them something to do," he says. "I didn't realize how much influence we had over their lives. They've still got a mentor."

The money, Jones says, went to fund jerseys and equipment for his players, and well as bus rental fees for games, which can be as far away as Baltimore and Southern Maryland. The team practices in Ward 5, at McKinley Technology High School, though Jones personally doesn't live in the ward. Jones says he's recruited as many as 70 players for the program, with a core group of 30 or so participating "on a consistent basis." Jones estimated about 60 percent are from Ward 5.

Jones says he heard about the funding opportunity through the CYTIC. "I pay attention to the council hearings. I did see that the councilmember was able to get something from the mayor for the ward, but I didn't know [any details]."

Thomas, he says, is "a big supporter of sports in the community....If you have any problems with anything he can possibly help you with, he'll reach out for you. He'll do everything he can." In appreciation, Jones has posted Thomas' logo on his Web site, with his slogan: "Building Bridges, Finding Solutions, People First"

Of the nine groups funded thus far, by far the largest chuck of money, $125,000, went to the Friends of Carter Barron Foundation, which has long run arts programs for at-risk youth from across the city.

The CYITC grant, says FOCB President Gloria Hightower, went toward a youth holiday musical, held in December at Howard University's Cramton Auditorium. The event featured 25 kids enrolled in the FOCB's year-round arts program, plus about 15 "interns" working on the production. Hightower estimates "at least 20, 30 percent were from Ward 5." (Thomas disagrees, saying, "I would think it was 50 percent of those kids." He added that Ward 5 seniors and parents attended the show free of charge.)

The six-figure check, Hightower says, went to cover a variety of expenses connected with the show—the venue rental fee, union musicians, professional sound and lights, training staff wages, youth stipends, and an honorarium for guest artist Yolanda Adams, a Grammy-winning gospel singer.

"You have to pay people to get quality work," says Hightower.

Like Jones, Hightower said she learned about the funding availability through CYITC, not through Thomas—though Hightower, too, vouched for Thomas' commitment to the community and to her program.

In defending his role in directing the funding, Thomas emphasizes that he made no final decisions; he instead tried to direct funds to groups that he knew to be worthy of investment. "Why as Ward 5 councilmember, when I have the highest amount of murders, would I not make a recommendation for any gang program? Why would I not make a recommendation when I'm on the street every day?" he says, adding he credits the nonprofits with reducing crime in his ward.

But LL's earmarking concerns alight on the sacredness of the competitive process. Thomas may know well worthy groups doing work in the ward; then again, there may be worthier groups that he might not know about or, for one reason or another, he might not support. That's why issuing a public request for bids and subjecting it to a rigorous independent review is the best way to spend city money.

Thomas says his role was little more that sending a letter of recommendation on behalf of certain groups. "I sent the money to the CYITC," he says. "I was grateful that they would listen."

Listen they did.

In an interview, London said that the CYTIC did not open the Ward 5 money to bids, as it did for most other pools of city funds. And Thomas was influential in the funding process: All of the groups that Thomas suggested, she says, are under consideration for funding; she emphasized that, by and large, the groups he recommended are worthy recipients of the funds. "We had not or have not been asked to do something that we're not comfortable with," she says.

LL was unable to locate D.C. incorporation documents or federal tax records for four grant designees, including the Ivey 23 Terps, a youth basketball team, and a group listed as All-Star Homework Assistance. None of those four have been given money yet; London said last week that CYITC continues to work with the groups to complete their paperwork.

Gray—who has led an earmark crackdown, vowing again to excise earmarks from the 2011 city budget—doesn't share LL's opinion that Thomas's designation deserves the E-word. Thomas, says Gray spokesperson Doxie McCoy, "doesn't have the power to direct this money, it is the Children's Trust."

"Councilmembers know their wards, so it is appropriate that they make suggestions," she says, "but they don't have the power to direct the decisions of the [CYITC]."

Because the increase, to $2.50, catapulted the District's rate over Maryland's $2-per-pack rate, Gandhi explains, many Maryland smokers who'd bought their tobacco in the District switched back to buying in Maryland. Add that to all the D.C. smokers who started buying cheap-as-dirt Virginia smokes, and you get the picture—instead of $45.4 million in revenue, Gandhi says the District will only bank $30 million.

But the legislative screw-up is more profound than that: The projections are now that this year's estimated cigarette tax revenues will fall below the pre-hike FY2009 levels ($37.6 million)—in other words, the tax hike got the city less revenue, not more.

Of course, council do-gooders will protest that this is really about a key public-health issue and that they're glad that fewer people are buying cancer sticks in D.C.

All true, and certainly admirable. But that wasn't the thinking at the time the tax was raised, LL can tell you that. The decision was made last July in a closed-door Wilson Building conference room (LL and a few other reporters were allowed inside). The cig-tax hike was on a menu of revenue-raising possibilities presented by Gandhi's office—and taxing smokers was a no-brainer for a legislative body looking to close a $660 million shortfall. LL recalls very little debate about the decision, and little mention of public health.

The good news: Maryland's currently considering another cig-tax hike, to $3.

For the current fiscal year, which started last Oct. 1, Gandhi is now estimating $17.7 million less in revenue. So what was a projected $223 million budget gap is now $240 million. And for the upcoming fiscal year, the revenue projection is down by $49.4 million from December estimates, meaning a $556 million problem is now a $605 million problem.

In a letter to the mayor and council, Gandhi explained why: ongoing weakness in the real-estate market, for one. But also because the city hasn't implemented new traffic penalties fast enough, it's given up some $18 million. And perhaps least surprising: The D.C. Council's move to hike cigarette taxes backfired; by raising the rates above Maryland's, Maryland smokers who'd been buying in D.C. switched back to Maryland. That miscue will cost about $15 million below projections in the current fiscal year

Get ready to do this all over again in June!

On the revenue side:

• A sales tax hike from 5.75 percent to 6 percent—deemed a surcharge that will expire after three years: $20.8 million
• A gas tax hike from 20 cents a gallon to 23.5 cents a gallon (matching Maryland): $3.5 million
• A 50-cent per-pack hike on cigarette taxes: $9.7 million
• Delaying indexed increases to income tax standard deduction/personal exemption: $5.2 million
• Raising D.C. government worker parking fee from $80 per month to $160 per month: $1.2 million
• Various license and permit hikes: $5.1 million

Budget cuts, which total about $103 million over what Mayor Adrian M. Fenty had proposed. Here's a few notable items:

• No earmarks. Period. $8 million
• Decrease police officers through attrition: $4.5 million
• Freeze uniform per-student funding formula for public schools at FY09 levels: $13.4 million
• Reduce summer school enrollment by 50 percent: $16.6 million
• A limited summer jobs program: $20 million
• Cut Access to Justice program, funding civil legal service to the indigent: $900,000
• Reduce library spending on books and media: $846,000
• Implement new TANF sanctions/incentives: $3.6 million (versus mayoral $6.1 million cut)
• Reduce parks-and-rec spending on property management (grass-cutting, etc.): $4 million

Follow along at @mikedebonis.

LL covered the possible arrival of medical marijuana here in his column a couple of weeks back (a column that was widely read for other reasons). LL had tried to get in touch with Barr, now a libertarian political activist and presidential candidate, for the story, but didn't connect with him in time.

But now, via a Libertarian Party press release, we have his feelings on the matter.

The House vote last week, Barr says in a statement, "represents an important step in the direction of individual freedom and properly limiting the power of the federal government."

Just so you don't get the wrong idea, Barr doesn't mention the essential propriety of smoking marijuana in his comments, for medical use or any other—just that the federal government has no business telling states and their citizens how to regulate it.

It's not time just yet to celebrate/consult your doctor—the measure still exists in the Senate version of the budget, and its fate is likely to be decided in conference committee.

Full statement follows:

Last week’s vote by the House of Representatives lifting the 11-year old prohibition on the District of Columbia from taking steps to pass and implement any measure decriminalizing or legalizing the sale or use of marijuana in the District, represents an important step in the direction of individual freedom and properly limiting the power of the federal government.

“While I in fact sponsored the initial appropriations limitation in 1998, the years since then have witnessed such a dramatic increase in federal government power and an unprecedented decrease in individual liberty, especially since 2001, that I have come to realize that such limitations as the so-called “Barr Amendment” are not and cannot be justified. It has become necessary to reevaluate the power of the federal government that I and others once were able or willing to justify, and do what we can to roll back the tide of government control.

“I have applauded also the indications by Attorney General Eric Holder to begin easing federal efforts against individuals in states that have moved to decriminalize or legalize the use of marijuana, and the fresh approach to the federal anti-drug effort as articulated earlier this year by Gil Kerlikowske, Director of the Office of National Drup Control Policy (the so-called “Drug Czar”).”

Photo by Joeff Davis—Creative Loafing

Amendments proposed so far include a number of social-policy riders that have been removed in subcommittee and committee actions. They also include attempts to prevent gay marriage in the District.

Here's a rundown:

• More than 25 members, including GOP leadership members Eric Cantor and Tom Price have proposed Amendment 87, which would "ensure that low-income DC students are able to receive a scholarship through the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program by removing the requirement that students must be OSP recipients during the 2009-2010 school year."
• Reps. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), Lincoln Davis (D-Tenn.), Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Jerry Costello (D-Ill.), Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), Jim Marshall (D-Ga.), and Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) have proposed Amendment 50, which would "reinstate the prohibition on all public funding of abortions within the District of Colombia [sic]."
• Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) proposes Amendment 37, which would "ensure that none of the local or Federal funds appropriated to the District of Columbia by this Act can be expended for any abortion except in instances where the life of the mother would be endangered or where the pregnancy was the result of incest or rape" and Amendment 38, which would "ensure that none of the funds appropriated by this Act to the District of Columbia could be used to operate a system for registering privately-owned firearms."
• Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) have proposed Amendment 16, which would "provide that any law enacted by the D.C. Council that recognizes any definition of marriage other than a union between one man and one woman shall be invalid unless approved by the electors of the District of Columbia in the first general election that follows the enactment of that law. This provision would apply to any law enacted by the Council at any time before, on, or after the enactment of this Act."
• Chaffetz and Jordan have also proposed the stricter Amendment 19, which would "prohibit D.C. funds from being used by the District of Columbia to implement or enforce any recognition of a marriage between two individuals other than a marriage between one man and one woman."
• Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) proposed Amendment 65, which would "prohibit any funds appropriated by the act from being used to violate the Second Amendment rights of the residents of the District of Columbia."
• Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.) proposes Amendment 64, which would "require the District of Columbia to comply with section 104 of the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services Establishment Act of 2004 (Sec. 2—1515.04, D.C. Official Code) and section 1102 of the Omnibus Juvenile Justice Act of 2004 (Sec. 24—941, D.C. Official Code) in operation of the New Beginnings Youth Facility located in the State of Maryland.."
• Rep. David Souder (R-Ind.) proposes Amendment 18, which would "Would prohibit District of Columbia funds from being used to enact or carry out any law, rule, or regulation to legalize or reduce penalties associated with the possession, use, or distribution of any schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. section 801 et seq.) or any tetrahydrocannabinols derivative. It also would prohibit funds in the Act from being used to carry out the Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Act of 1998 (Initiative 59) approved by D.C. electors on November 3, 1988." In other words, Souder's the new Bob Barr.

So if you're associated with...

• Columbia Heights Youth Club
• In-Da-Streets
• C.H.O.I.C.E. Inc.
• Cabel Foundation Inc.
• Ethiopian Community Service and Development Council Support
• North Tivoli Business Association
• Parents Association of Boys and Girls Club No. 10
• Park Road Business Association
• Uniting Our Youth
• Cease Fire Don't Smoke the Brothers
• Friends of Kennedy Recreation Center

...get off your ass and send your stuff in, or no free taxpayer money for you!

Council budget aide Justin Constantino is sitting by the fax machine waiting for your paperwork. Several groups already today have sent in their last-minute submissions.

Therein, LL asked a couple of questions: Why cut teachers first? Aren't there central-office savings to be reaped?

This week, some answers came to those questions, from DCPS spokesperson Jennifer Calloway. "DCPS has cut the central office budget to the bare minimum," she writes in a statement, "reducing spending over the past 2 years while significantly increasing funding going directly to schools."

"Central office," by the way, is shorthand for all school-system functionaries who aren't directly serving students in schools—not just those who work at DCPS headquarters at 825 North Capitol Street. And if the central office has indeed been cut to the bone, Rhee will have accomplished quite something.

As LL detailed in a fall 2007 cover story, superintendents have been railing about a bloated DCPS headquarters for years. Rhee was granted the ability in late 2007 to fire central office employees at will; on one day last March, she fired nearly 100 employees working at 825 North Capitol.

Calloway points out that the proposed 2010 budget includes about $138 million in central office spending; $110 million of that are for "fixed costs" that include "utilities, food services, security, student data systems, payroll, human resources and procurement."

Then there's the matter of stimulus money. In the Fenty administration's initial request for stimulus dollars, schools were made a top priority.

So why not tap some of that money? That, according to Bill Turque in the Washington Post, is what council Chairman Vincent C. Gray has been suggesting.

Calloway says that DCPS is entitled to $29.4 million in stimulus funds for next year, and that money has "already been rolled into the per-pupil funding formula" for the year. "This money is not an independent piece of the overall budget that can be reallocated at will," she writes. As for an additional $42 million in federal funds from the education department, she says, "We presented the federal government with a proposal that included specific innovations and reforms; therefore it is not an option to use the funds for other purposes."

The budget tussle is set to come to a head Tuesday, when budget legislation comes up for a second and final vote—and Rhee's savvy politicking is put to the test.

"Ultimately, if the Council makes the decision that DCPS enrollment will be at 42,000 students," Calloway writes, "the only responsible action we can take is to staff to that number."

The letter laid out all the money that would have to be pulled from schools—itemized and broken down by ward. (Smart move: Hey, Harry Thomas, want to explain to your constituents why you voted to cut $3.9 million from Ward 5 schools?)

This wasn't the first letter Rhee had sent Gray and the council.

Last week, she had sent another missive [PDF], asking the council to reconsider its moves to cut the budget of the Deputy Mayor of Education's office and to remove the State Board of Education from the Office of the State Superintendent of Education. Rhee says the council moves, which were ratified yesterday, "begin to erode the structure established by and the progress which has ensued under" school reform legislation passed in 2007.

Much of the letter concerns the decision to take the Interagency Collaboration and Service Integration Commission (aka ICSIC—"ick-sick") out of DME Victor Reinoso's shop and put it in the DCPS Office of Youth Engagement. That office, Rhee writes, "is building twilight programs, student attendance and truancy initiatives, and the Youth Engagement Academy," and as such "cannot take on the additional responsibilities of ICSIC without diverting its focus from these other important initiatives." Better, she says, to leave it with Reinoso, where it "has the force of the Mayor's office to coordinate across agencies and the dedicated focus and resources which would otherwise be lost in the day-to-day functions of another agency."

Rhee also takes issue with the council's move to pump up the SBOE's independence, saying it is "likely to lessen the policy focus of the Board and create the temptation to micromanage" and claiming that moving the school ombudsman's office under their aegis "is likely to politicize" that operation.

In closing, she writes, "we need to continue our progress within the structure and the time line promulgated by the Act. It is too early to turn back."

Full letter after the jump.

May 5, 2009

The Honorable Vincent C. Gray, Chairman
Council of the District of Columbia
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 504
Washington D.C. 20004

Dear Chairman Gray:

I respectfully ask you to reconsider the recommendations made by the Committee of the Whole ("COW"), which begin to erode the structure established by and the progress which has ensued under the Public Education Reform Amendment Act ("the Act"). In April 2007, the Council took the bold step of passing the Act and giving the Mayor control of the public school system. At its heart, the Act sought to improve student achievement by clearly defining the various functions of the different educational agencies and affording time for the reform to occur. More specifically, the Council was explicit in its desire to create an environment that allowed the District of Columbia Public Schools ("DCPS") to focus on the central business of the teaching and learning, in part by protecting the school system from functions that served to distract from this singular focus. Even more importantly, the Council wisely established a five-year commitment to measure the success of the new governance structure. The multi-year time frame acknowledged what we know: Real change and real results take time.

Last week, the COW recommended changes which undo key components of the Act. If adopted by the Council, the COW's recommendations will undercut the defined structure, the dedicated focus and the five-year timeframe established by the Act. These changes will be particularly challenging less than two years into our collective reform efforts. The recommendations also move away from the structure and focus of the Act, which charged other entities with assuming responsibilities once entrusted, but often ignored, by DCPS.

We are beginning to see the results of some initiatives embedded in the Act, such as the Interagency Collaboration and Service Integration Commission ("ICSIC"). Among its many accomplishments in the first 18 months, ICSIC has launched DC START, the District's first evidence-based early intervention program aimed at reducing the number of children and families who slip into crisis; led to the receipt of federal grant dollars for school emergency preparation and planning and provided innovative training for MPD School Resource Officers; produced a Children's Health Action Plan and begun work on a citywide school health strategy; and created a vetting program that has increased the quality of afterschool programs provided by community-based partners in schools together around a common agenda focused on shared challenges and results. The impact of providing these "wrap around services" to our children is significant.

I attribute the success of ICSIC in large part to the fact that the Deputy Mayor of Education ("DME") has the force of the Mayor's office to coordinate across agencies and the dedicated focus and resources which would otherwise be lost in the day-to-day functions of another agency. This model has been proven in both the private and public sector. It is proving itself in the District.

At this time, DCPS has neither the dedicated focus nor ability to continue this important work at this level. The Office of Youth Engagement ("OYE"), which the COW has proposed to oversee ICSIC, has existed for only a few short months. OYE is building twilight programs, student attendance and truancy initiatives, and the Youth Engagement Academy. Next year, OYE will take on the mammoth task of implementing the new student discipline policy. At this time, it cannot take on the additional responsibilities of ICSIC without diverting its focus from these other important initiatives.

I also question the COW's recommendation to move the Office of the Ombudsperson to an expanded office of the State Board of Education. At its current staffing level, the State Board of Education has clearly focused on state policy level functions such as adopting academic standards and state rules in key areas like attendance, residency and truancy. The proposed increase to 18, including the Ombudsman office, positions is beyond the staffing for other comparable state boards and likely to lessen the policy focus of the Board and create the temptation to micromanage. I believe the transfer of the Ombudsman to an expanded State Board is likely to politicize the Ombudsman's office that has responded to over 1,000 parent and community concerns.

Chairman Gray, we need to continue our progress within the structure and the time line promulgated by the Act. It is too early to turn back. I respectfully ask that you reconsider the changes proposed in the COW's recommendations relative to the Fiscal Year 2010 Budget.

Michelle A. Rhee
Chancellor

Cc: Mayor Adrian M. Fenty
Members of the Council of the District of Columbia

Holy Pork: From Muriel Bowser's public services and consumer affairs committee: "$500,000...is transferred to the Department of Parks and Recreation...for the sole and exclusive use of beatification of passive parks within the boundaries of Ward 4" [emphasis added]. Now Bowser's Catholic and all, but does she have enough pull with the pope to sanctify her parklands?

Dept. of Me: From Harry Thomas Jr.'s libraries, parks, and recreation committee: "Redirect $1M from General Improvement (RG001) to Harry Thomas, Jr. Recreation Center Project, created in the 2009 Capital Budget." The height of narcissistic legislating? Probably not: There is a Harry Thomas Sr. rec center in Eckington, named after the current councilmember's father and predecessor as Ward 5 councilmember.

And if there's anything that's become perfectly clear about Mayor Adrian M. Fenty in recent months, it's that he's not above petty political payback.

So how else to explain this: Yesterday, Ward 3 Councilmember Mary M. Cheh held a "Ward 3 Education Forum" at Alice Deal Middle School in order to keep her constituents apprised of various ed developments. She invited representatives from the D.C. Public Schools, the Office of Public Education Facilities Modernization, the school ombudsman's office, and the State Board of Education to attend in a purely informational role.

About 50 residents showed to the meeting, but three invited guests did not: Tony Robinson and Will Mangum of OPEFM and Jesus Aguirre of DCPS. Cheh explained to the crowd that she learned shortly before the meeting that the mayor had told the three not to attend.

Cheh declined to comment on the allegations; mayoral spokesperson Mafara Hobson said only that any suggestion that the employees were ordered not to attend are "false." She has yet to furnish any further explanation.

On Tuesday, Ward 1 Councilmember Jim Graham pre-emptively told reporters that he'll be directing a grant or two in his pending committee report. "We do have earmarks," he said, "but we have kept them to an absolute minimum."

Absolute minimum, eh? Quite a boast for a guy whose committee report last year LL called "a true masterpiece of the porkly arts."

LL spent this evening poring through his report, released today. Graham's barely lost a step. By LL's count, he's sent more than $6 million to favored community groups and to projects almost entirely located within his home ward. That's roughly the same amount he sent to Ward 1 groups and projects last year.

Where'd the money come from? Most of it came from three spots: $6.8 million came from the new "Sweeper Cam" program, where street sweepers are now equipped with automated cameras to record illegally parked cars. That revenue, from an estimated 237,500 $40 tickets, hadn't been figured into the 2010 budget. Another $12.6 million comes from "enhanced neighborhood parking enforcement citations"—in other words, more parking enforcement officers writing more tickets on nights and weekends. Graham also found $12.7 million in Metro funds "double counted" in the budget. So he spent that, too.

Now most of that went to fund various agency budget lines and to restore programs in other agencies. But a bunch of it didn't. Here's the full list:

• $400,000 to "fund construction of an alley in Square 394/Lot 59 in FY 2010 to include paving, drainage easement, lighting improvements, and other required services."
• $1,250,000 to the Columbia Heights / Shaw Family Support Collaborative, the fiduciary agent and member of the Citywide Coordinating Council on Youth Violence Prevention Executive Committee "to sustain progress in the creation of a city-wide, community based gang/crew violence intervention."
  —$250,000 to the Ward 4 Georgia Ave. Family Support Collaborative
  —50,000 to the Columbia Heights Youth Club at the DPR Columbia Heights Youth Center
  —$75,000 to MentoringWorks2 at the DPR Parkview Recreation Center
  —$70,000 to Keely’s Boxing and Youth Center at the former Meyer Elementary School
  —$50,000 for In-Da-Streets at the Hubbard Place, located at 3500 14th St. NW.
  —$600,000 for "gang / crew intervention and prevention grants awarded by the process established by the CCCYVP and in consultation with the Children’s Youth Investment Trust Corporation and other members of the CCCYVP Advisory Board."
• $50,000 to the Reeves Recovery Group, Inc.
• $250,000 to the U Street Theatre Foundation for the Lincoln Theatre "for grants to support non-profit organizations and performance based activities, including developing performance arts groups and school cultural enrichment activities."
• $300,000 to the Columbia Heights / Shaw Family Support Collaborative "to continue the services of the Georgia Ave. / Kennedy St. Green Team"
• $250,000 to the Park Road Business Association and North Tivoli Business Association "to establish a Green Team in their respective business corridors"
• $150,000 to the Columbia Heights / Shaw Family Support Collaborative "for sustaining and enhancements to the U Street Green Team"
• $150,000 to the Columbia Heights / Shaw Family Support Collaborative "for the Lower Georgia Avenue Green Team."
• $500,000 to "support the newly assembled community stakeholders group representing the youth, parents and stakeholders of Clubhouses #10, #11, Eastern Branch and Jelleff" for "seed money to begin to establish community based programming back into their respective Clubhouses and technical assistance to help incorporate their group as a citywide body to represent all of the District Boys and Girls Clubs."
• $250,000 to the Boys and Girls Club of Greater Washington "to support their ongoing efforts to increase capacity training and programs at the District’s Clubhouses."
• $100,000 to Uniting Our Youth, Inc. "for the operating costs associated with the Children’s Centers located at Kelly Miller and Park Morton housing communities."
• $75,000 to the Lower Georgia Ave. Job Training Center "for job training, skill building, family support, and employment placement services."
• $150,000 to the D.C. Caribbean Carnival Inc. "to support its annual Caribbean style parade and 2 day cultural festival."
• $200,000 to Fiesta DC "to support its annual Latino Festival of Washington."
• $100,000 to AdamsMorgan MainStreet Group "to support its annual Adams Morgan Day Festival of Washington."
• $50,000 to the Mautner Project "to enhance its ongoing programs."
• $50,000 to the D.C. Latino Federation "to enhance its ongoing programs."
• $50,000 to the Ethiopia Community Service and Development Council "to enhance its ongoing programs."
• $50,000 to the CuDC "to support the Source Theater’s operational efforts."
• $100,000 to the Gala Hispanic Theater "to support GALA’s operational efforts."
• $75,000 to the Vietnamese-American Community Service Center "to enhance its services to the community."
• $50,000 to the Wilderness Leadership and Learning (WILL), "a positive youth development program focusing on using the outdoors as a learning resource."
• $75,000 to Educational Organization for United Latin Americans "to maintain the Center’s ongoing efforts to support Latin American seniors in the District."
• $50,000 to New Futures "to support their scholarship fund for young people living in poverty to attend vocational training programs and colleges."
• $50,000 to Mt. Pleasant Main Street "to support street cleanup (“Green Team”) and business development in the Mount Pleasant neighborhood, including historic way finding signs produced by DDOT."
• $125,000 to the Dance Institute of Washington "to enhance its ongoing programs."
• $75,000 to the Barbara Chambers Children's Center
• $100,000 to the Joseph’s House
• $75,000 to the Latino Economic Development Corporation "to support its Small Business Development program and the expansion of the Local First DC program in Wards 1 and 4."
• $100,000 to Jubilee Housing "to support its Jubilee JumpStart program to promote bilingual care and education for infants, toddlers and preschoolers in Jubilee Housing and for low-income neighbors."
• $250,000 "to fund capital improvements at the 12th Street YMCA/Thurgood Marshall Center."
• $250,000 "to fund capital improvements at the Mary Church Terrell House."
• $150,000 "to support storefront improvements in the Georgia Avenue and 14th Street Corridors."
• $250,000 "to fund capital improvements at the U Street Foundation."
• $50,000 to Mt. Pleasant Main Street "to support street cleanup (“Green Team”) and business development in the Mount Pleasant neighborhood, including historic way finding signs produced by DDOT. As such, this initiative is also described in that section of this report."

Once again, LL, as a five-year resident of Ward 1, expresses his thanks to his councilmember.