Chris Shott

Despite the owner's arrest on Nov. 1, business has carried on as usual at the eatery. Just last week, the venue hosted a viewing party for the premier of Anacostia: The Web Series. Stopping in over the weekend, WaPo describes a pretty typical scene: "A handful of diners sipped iced tea and beer while watching college football on the restaurant’s flat-screen televisions, and a pair of employees chatted at the granite bar."

How long that lasts remains to be seen. A conviction in Dasher's case would no doubt pose serious consequences to Uniontown's future. Regulators tend to frown upon felons holding liquor licenses—though there have been exceptions.

Read the rest at Y&H.

The Ward 8 council race has its official first dust-up, and it doesn't even include Councilmember Marion Barry.

Jacque Patterson, former head of the Ward 8 Democrats and almost at-large council candidate, tells LL he's going to make a run at Barry's seat: "I've got my wife's approval, I'm gonna run."

An official kickoff is scheduled for later this month. Patterson says he informed Barry, who is expected to seek re-election, of his plans last week. Patterson stressed that he doesn't plan on attacking the Grand Poobah of District politics in any way shape or form.

"You don't run against Barry," says Patterson. "You speak to what is really hurting and happening in the ward."

But that doesn't mean Patterson himself won't be on the receiving end of some political fisticuffs. ANC Commissioner Darrell Gaston, who is also seeking to dethrone Barry, has scheduled a news conference tomorrow where he says he will present evidence that Patterson is a no good signature forger.

Read the rest at Loose Lips.

Debate after the jump!

Barry writes or "writes":

"My legislation, while imperfect and incomplete, is intended to start a serious dialogue on how to break the cycle of generational poverty, government dependency and economic disparity in the city.

At present, the District is one of only a few jurisdictions in the country that spend local government funds to allow TANF aid to go on indefinitely. Unfortunately, this unsound provision in our local law has been coupled with a system that has failed our residents for years. The result has been to enslave residents in joblessness and dependency on the government rather than lifting them up and giving them an opportunity to achieve self-sufficiency through job training and employment.

That's one reason the District now has 17,505 families receiving TANF benefits, with over 40 percent receiving benefits for more than five years. We must do better."

Barry could have started this conversation years ago. His ward has had staggering unemployment, staggeringly bad schools, and, of course, entrenched crime for years. His measure might make sense if he'd done more than set up phony nonprofits to address these issues. And, well, the councilmember wants to limit more than TANF benefits, according to Bread for the City.

Bread for the City had this to say about Barry's TANF proposal:

"If passed, this legislation would limit TANF recipients to 60 months (5 years) of TANF benefits. Even worse, the current language would make families ineligible for all public benefits – no Medicaid, no child care, no food stamps, no homeless shelter.

Research has shown that these harsh tactics are not effective at encouraging work. They are likely to result in higher rates of child poverty, with many families disconnected from any form of support."

*Yesterday, Loose Lips posted a story about Barry's war with WaPo's editorial board.

The ANC Seegars chairs, 8E, filed a motion with the Board of Zoning Adjustments on behalf of three residents—Brian Townes, Tonette Sivells and Shayla Edgerton—trying to stop Peaceoholics from developing a building they own on Congress Street SE. The filing says, pre-emptively, that a certificate of occupancy application for the building will be filed in error and that a building permit issued to the group was issued under false pretenses.

“Was the building permit inaccurately issued?” Seegers asked on behalf of the residents at a hearing Tuesday night.

Jauhar Abraham, CEO of the Peaceoholics, said the building will be an “independent living” facility for youth between the ages 18 and 24. The motion claimed the group's intended use for the building more closely resembles a “community based residential facility." That means Peaceoholics will need to show proof of several licenses which they do not currently have, according to Abraham. He says the building will serve as low-income housing for young adults who need some form of support or rehabilitation.

The case was continued until October 28, by which point the Peaceoholics should have submitted their certificate of occupancy application. The delay will also give the board more time to review the evidence Seegars and the ANC submitted.

If the proceedings are delayed much longer, though, Peaceoholics may find their allies in D.C. government are dwindling. The group was very tight with Mayor Adrian Fenty, but campaigned aggressively against Vince Gray's election.

Not too long ago, 21-year-old ANC 8C03 candidate Larry T. Pretlow II hatched a plan for lowering crime in Ward 8. "We have a large issue with public safety," he says. The 4.0-G.P.A. Strayer University student believes "a lot of our crime is from youth," so he came up with a way of curtailing the problem and made it a part of his campaign platform. If elected, he would work to institute a ward-specific curfew, one that would require all minors in his neighborhood to be indoors by 8:30 p.m. While the D.C. Council recently voted down an attempt to push the city-wide curfew up to 10 p.m., Pretlow says his plan was well received by neighborhood activists.

"Mr. Pretlow—I am a resident in Ward 8 and I agree that a curfew is indeed needed to curtail crime," supporter Brian Townes emailed Pretlow."If the parents don't care enough to have their kids in by a certain time then I guess the gov't has to do it. I have seen first hand young kids hanging out in the streets well into the morning hours. They are loud and disrespectful and quite frankly, up to no good.Thank you for the job you are doing."

By the time Pretlow got Townes' fan mail, however, things had gotten complicated. A youth rights advocate, Pretlow happens to be president of the D.C. chapter of the National Youth Rights Association (NYRA). Nationally, NYRA has worked for changes like lowering the voting age to to 16 and changing drinking laws: "The National Youth Rights Association believes American youth alcohol policy should recognize the inevitability of alcohol consumption among youth and seek to reduce the harm of that alcohol use, rather than unrealistically try to keep young people from drinking at all," says the organization's Web site.

The association also wants to eliminate curfew laws entirely: "We believe such laws violate young people's rights under the First and Fourteenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution." So Pretlow's proposed 8:30 wind-down-time didn't sit well with NYRA leaders and members. Pretlow, who's running against long-time incumbent Mary Cuthbert decided to amend his position.

That is, if by "amend," you mean, "completely abandon." As of Wednesday, he's no longer for an earlier curfew, or any curfew at all for Ward 8 youth willing to stick to the rules.The curfew law is unfair, he's decided; it's meant to prevent crime, but not all youths are criminals. "You're punishing them [law-abiding youth] for something someone else has done," Pretlow says, now that he's seen the light.

He broke down his new stance in a reply to Townes:

"Thanks so much for your message. Yes, I agree that a curfew is needed to curtail crime in Ward 8, mainly "youth" crimes. As a 21 year-old I'm speaking from the side of the youth, but I'm also largely considering the side of all community members, such as yourself. Here's my plan... I want to enforce a Limited-Curfew for Youth, such as using 'curfew' as a discipline measure for youth that have been 'charged' with crimes. Maybe this curfew could be lifted after a set number of volunteer hours have been completed. – The 'Redemption Policy'. I also think that youth who have been suspended from school should also be on a more increased curfew. So, my position is that, all youth shouldn't suffer the Curfew. Curfew is a result of youth crimes, but all youth do not commit crimes."

Pretlow says it's tough trying to satisfy both trustworthy youths and crime-fearful adults when it comes to the curfew law. Even since he wrote Townes back, he's had to change his plan a little. Pretlow, who will likely be testifying at the Council's July 10 hearing on youths, says he's going to tell the council that there should be no curfew at all, but if the District has one, it shouldn't just fall on young offenders, but adults, too. In his latest curfew plan, any District resident who has committed a crime would be subject to the time limits, not just youths. "If you're going to have a curfew to prevent crime, shouldn't that affect adults too?" Pretlow asks. Limits on criminals of all ages—maybe that's the compromise Pretlow needs to get NYRA and the neighborhood NIMBYs on the same side.

Clark Ray, who is challenging Mendelson for his at-large council seat, and his campaign team greeted all of the meeting's attendees with a targeted flier: "Another election year meeting in Ward 8. We Deserve Better: Communities need to be involved every day to solve the issue of crime, not just during an election."

The crowd inside was scarcely more welcoming toward Mendelson, who chairs the Council’s committee on public safety and the judiciary, or the other panel members he brought with him, including representatives from the Office of the D.C. Attorney General, the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), the Office of the U.S. Attorney General for D.C., and the D.C. Superior Court. 

Gathered just a block away from site of the March 30 shooting that left four dead, the group of roughly 70 victims' relatives, concerned community members, and anti-violence activists voiced tremendous frustration with how they've seen the D.C. government deal with violent crime.

Patricia Jefferies, the grandmother of 16-year-old shooting victim Brishell Jones, asked why Attorney General Peter Nickles had the time to look into Councilmember and mayoral hopeful Vincent Gray’s controversial fence but was too busy to meet with family members of those killed on March 30. Another Congress Heights resident wanted to know why another murder she witnessed firsthand was still an open case.

Naturally, the most vocal audience member was Peaceoholics co-founder Ronald Moten, who railed against Mendelson’s harsh policies regarding PCP and his lenient stance on curfews. But what he seemed most peeved about was Councilmember Gray and Harry Thomas Jr. doling out money for anti-violence initiatives in what he described as an unethical manner.

When Moten called for him to launch an investigation into the nonprofit allocations, Mendelson attempted to diffuse the issue by telling him the U.S. Attorney’s Office would be in charge of investigating such claims. That prompted Moten to remind him the Council had no problem investigating the Dominican firetruck donation on its own.

“When are you going to stop these dog and pony show hearings?" Moten asked. “All y'all doing is playing political games. And because we speak out about it, we get punished.”

Much of the meeting focused on how the D.C. government treats youth offenders. There was one agency conspicuously absent from the panel: the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services (DYRS). Mendelson was quick to announce that representatives from DYRS were slated to attend, but sent an “interesting” email that afternoon that “suggested they were told not to come,” he said.

Despite being stood up by DYRS, the group discussed youth issues at length, particularly the problem of truancy and how it contributes to high levels of violent crime.  According to Second Seventh District Commander Joel Maupin, MPD picked up 7,000 truants last year, including over 1,000 in Ward 8.

“If the kids aren’t in school, they’re not going to get employment,” said Lee Satterfield, the chief judge of the D.C. Superior Court. “It’s not rocket science in terms of where you need to start.”

When Mendelson asked why youngsters who went on to be involved in shootings were let out of juvenile supervision, however, he found the heat turned back on himself and his Council colleagues. Because of the District’s strict juvenile confidentiality laws, Deputy D.C. Attorney General for Public Safety Robert Hildum said government officials cannot share that kind of information with the public.

“In my experience, [the confidentially laws] don’t protect the child as much as the agencies in charge of that child,” Hildum said. “It’s within the Council’s power to change that.”

Seegars put out a press release demanding that the group, which aims to turn at-risk youths away from violence, be investigated for taking three teens wanted by authorities away on a recent Maryland retreat.

The teens, who were being sought for skipping out on a D.C. Youth Rehabilitation Services (DYRS) facility at the time, were later also picked up in connection with the murder of middle school principal Brian Betts.

For weeks, Seegars has been tangling with the Peaceoholics over the group's construction of a transitional living facility for at-risk youths in Congress Heights. For their part, the Peaceoholics recently filed a lawsuit accusing Seegars of libel.

Seegars says the new revelations about the accused killers' participation in Peaceoholics programming has only heightened neighborhood concerns about the group's Congress Heights project.

"The government, Mayor, Ward 8 Councilmember and Department of Housing and Community Development are ignoring the complaints by the ANC Commissioners and the community," writes Seegars in a statement. "In light of the recent incident, whereas, Ronald Moten, Peaceoholics, admitted that he allowed fugitives to participate in his program, under his direct supervision, without first getting a clearance on the alleged murderers of a school teacher. The immediate neighbors to 1300 Congress St., have grown more frighten of the mystery facility that is underway to open there by the negligent, untrained, hotheaded maverick."

Yesterday, Peaceoholics co-founder Moten told City Desk that though the currently jailed teens had attended one of the group's retreats, the organization had no idea DYRS and police were looking for the kids.

Morning!

First, a mini roundup: Washington Post readers don't like pictures of gay men kissing ("please don’t shove this 'Gay' business in our face"; "I will be glad when your rag goes out of business. Real men marry women"; "disturbing"). Former representative Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) has some splainin' to do (it's not every day you can Google "tickling" and come up with a breaking news story). And Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson and his betrothed, DCPS Chancellor Michelle Rhee, are not Romeo and Juliet.

Now to the question of the week: Should Georgetown secede?

Discussion after the jump.

Carol Joynt, a writer and former TV producer who's behind the weekly talk show "The Q&A Cafe" and is the former owner of the now closed Nathans, threw that doozy out there this week on her blog, saying:

This isn't as much a question against the city as it is a question  for Georgetown. Its worth forming a panel to explore the idea and also inviting public debate. Reason one is that DC's not going to get home rule. I just don't see it happening. Why should we wait around, caving into powerlessness, when we could come together to create a governing body that helps to improve the quality of living right here where we live?

We could be the City of Georgetown or the Town of Georgetown. Regardless, have our own mayor, our own council, our own police force (on some streets we already do), our own public school system, contract out – like DC does – for a lot of the utility work (think: plowing snow), our own parking enforcement, our own ABC Board, and use our local tax dollars for Georgetown's own needs. We already provide a local bus system.

If you think about it, it makes sense. If you live in Georgetown, how much of the management of the city government relates to you in a positive way? How many city government decisions are made with Georgetown even remotely in the equation?

Anyone from any other D.C. neighborhoods want to answer that?

The Georgetown Metropolitan weighed in with some interesting history. Turns out there's precedent for this, and I'm not talking about the Southern states or Quebec. In 1838, Georgetown residents wrote a motion to request "retrocession" of all D.C. land west of Rock Creek. And the motion passed! And then some folks went to Annapolis, where it also seemed like a good idea! And then Congress pissed on it!

GM's Topher Matthews says, perhaps needlessly, that Joynt's suggestion is "totally ridiculous and never going to see the light of day. There is no way the government of the District or Congress would approve. And if there’s one thing that can get the rest of the District to hate Georgetown more, it would be to agitate for secession."

And Joynt more or less agrees:

I'm a realist. I know this won't happen. But I like the debate. It reminds everyone on the inside and outside of our "borders" that Georgetown is a village and the residents can be engaged in civic activism. We're not passive, but we get distracted. Too much of our focus is directed at the not always attractive commercial development of M Street, when its important to look at and nurture every nook and cranny of the commercial and residential areas.

But that's not the good part.

As for whether "secession" would further dispossess the dispossessed, I always look to Marion Barry. He treats his ward like it is a city and that he's its mayor and their needs come before all others. Say what you will about him, he looks out for his flock. He fights for what they need, what they deserve. Its the same with Ward 1's Jim Graham.

Wait, did she just say Georgetown needs someone like Marion Barry?

Photo by sylvester75117, Creative Commons Attribution License

But "east of the river" isn't settling too well with relative newcomers to the area. Some of these people want to call the region "River East," an appellation that summons images of plush, new homes and green pastures. Champions of the new name have coalesced in an organization called (logically) River East Emerging Leaders (r.e.e.l.).

This is a gentrification battle. Old-timers don't like the idea of rebranding the area. The story quotes 35-year Anacostia resident Bessie Brown as saying, “I hate it.”

Though I am not a resident of the territory in question, I vote for "River East." Not on ideological grounds, but rather for the sake of simplicity. It's two syllables shorter. It's simpler. Change can be good for a name.

Hours after Ward 8 Councilmember Marion Barry was harshly sanctioned by his D.C. Council colleagues yesterday, he retreated to Matthews Memorial Baptist Church, located on a bluff above Suitland Parkway, to deliver his State of the Ward address before hundreds of zealous supporters.

The narrative for such an event would seem rather pat: redemption, loyalty, Christian charity toward one's fellow man. The event, after all, took place in a church, among Barry's favored locales these days, where "judge not lest ye be judged" (an aphorism uttered plenty of times last night) allows Barry a space away from his many judge-worthy failings.

But LL spied a more cynical narrative, one that bodes ill for the councilmember and his ward. The Marion Barry system of retail politics—or put more bluntly, patronage—is dying, if it isn't dead already.

The key moment of the night came well before Barry's remarks, as Pastor C. Matthew Hudson warmed up the crowd. After asking Barry's political allies and staff to take a bow, Hudson had another request:

"Everybody that's ever received anything...if you've received anything—job, reference, promotion—from his service over these five decades, stand."

Up went virtually the entire crowd.

Hudson added: "Truth is, if we did that in Prince Geroge's County, the whole Prince George's County would have to stand. Say amen! How many of those got those houses out there because someone gave 'em a job. Someone gave 'em a chance."

Amen!

That theme continued with Barry's hand-picked choice to introduce him: Alberto Gomez, owner of Prince Construction Co., a contractor that's benefited from loads of government work over the years. In his remarks, Gomez gave Barry great credit for hiring Hispanics in his four mayoral terms and assisting minority businesses. He mentioned little, if anything, Barry's done since leaving the mayoralty.

And then came Barry to the podium.

"I love serving you. I love fighting for you. I love standing up for you. I love encouraging you. I love uplifting you. I love bringing as many resources to the ward that I can," he said. He continued: "I want to fight for you still. I want to commend you and encourage you still. I want to uplift you still. But. more importantly. I want to do all I can to put some money in your pockets."

The old saying "help you help yourself" doesn't mean much in Ward 8 politics, or at least inside Matthews Memorial last night. To Barry, being one of his constituents is about simply helping yourself.

Problem is, Barry's not in a position to help much of anyone any more, as his speech would prove. He bragged about transforming downtown as mayor, building a convention center and a sports area. He talked about the revitalization of U Street.

When he talked about the present, Barry defaulted to the usual litany about his ward—highest unemployment rate, highest dropout rate, highest illiteracy rate, boarded up buildings, crumbing sidewalks—but failed to mention much that he's done in the past year to do anything about it.

Even his lengthy prepared remarks—which he, thankfully, departed wholesale from—names only a couple of legislative accomplishments for the year prior: he boasts of supporting an unemployment insurance reform bill, legislation that has yet to pass through Barry's committee. And he talks about allotting $4.6 million for job training—0.07 percent of the city budget, that.

Sure, he calls for plenty—a 'Green Job Summit,' more experienced teachers, more affordable housing—but says nothing about what's he done to make it happen. Instead, "the pressure lies at Fenty's feet," as he was prepared to say last night. It's someone else's problem, he tells his constituents—that's why you're feeling "insignificant, misunderstood, underestimated, mistreated."

Truth is, now that Barry has lost his committee, won't be trusted with another earmark, and is at constant odds with a mayor who isn't nearly as forgiving as Pastor Hudson, he doesn't have much anymore to hand out besides empty rhetoric.

Which explains this plea: "When you judge Marion Barry, judge him by the whole book, not just three or four pages....Look at the 31 years I've served this community, the 31 years I've given of myself."

He's counting on no one asking: Marion, what have you done for me lately?

Donna Watts-Brighthaupt, beloved folk hero and future bold name and/or photo in Barry obit montage, is impossible to figure out. Yesterday, she attended Barry's State of the Ward speech. Before the speech, she posted this cryptic comment on Facebook:

"You'll soon know why MB the politician continues to keep me close. I'll work with him and anyone who'll place my Ward's interests and future before their individual personal goals, feelings & public positions. The tougher it gets, the tougher I'll become."

*photo by Darrow Montgomery.

Big news of yesterday: Marion Barry was censured.

Big news of today: Marion Barry was censured yesterday.

Big news of tomorrow: Marion Barry was censured earlier this week.

And not only censured. The D.C. Council also voted to strip him of his committee chairmanship and refer the findings of the Bennett Report to a criminal prosecutor. Can you say "consequences"?

In Webster's New World College Dictionary (Fourth Edition), under the "consequence" entry, there is a definition not just for that word, but for the phrase "take the consequences." It means "to accept the results of one's actions."

Barry wasn't so much into taking the consequences. He had this (and more) to say at the John A. Wilson Building yesterday afternoon: "How can I be accused of breaking something that doesn't exist?" And: "You punished Marion Barry on the words of one person." And: "The people of Ward 8 are going to get more out of me than ever before." And: "I'm still gonna work. I'm the jobs czar in this town."

Last night, when he delivered his State of the Ward address at Matthews Memorial Baptist Church (pastors first prayed for him and anointed him with oil), Barry added some more: "I'm not gonna let anyone or anything turn me around." And: "They may take my committee chair, but they can't take my dignity."

I won't fill up any more space here by repeating anything else, that shall be Loose Lips' job (hope you've been following his live-tweeting). The Morning Roundup must move on.

To Gay Marriage Day! Right here in the District! City Paper will of course have full coverage of the goings-on down at D.C. Superior Court, where we expect to run into the ever-thoughtful Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps. By the way, here are the Sexist's Gay Marriage Day guidelines and a little gay marriage limerick, for good measure.

One more thing, because there's always one more thing: The Smithsonian announced yesterday that it has NO GODDAMN INTEREST ARE YOU KIDDING ME? in accepting as a donation the suit O.J. Simpson wore on the day he was acquitted—the so-called "acquittal suit." Earlier in the week, it was reported that a Great Compromise had been reached in a dispute over that suit. Who knew there were people who actually cared about it?

Lawyers for O.J., who is presently in jail in case you had forgotten, though I can't see how you would've because it's so nice to think about him rotting there (though maybe he isn't rotting?), and Fred Goldman, whose son Ronald was murdered in 1994 along with O.J.'s ex-wife, Nicole, had both laid claim to the suit. But they decided to finally put aside their differences in the name of, you know, something greater than themselves—namely, the American people. Somehow, they thought it would be normal for this suit to appear in a glass case in the same institution that displays the original Star-Spangled Banner and a piece of Route 66.

Note: not normal.

Happy hump day. Go get married!

Photo by emdot, Creative Commons Attribution License

As the D.C. Council gets set to throw the book at Councilmember Marion Barry, party leaders in his ward still haven't released their own public statement on the troubled politician. The Ward 8 Dems are still debating internally on what to say or whether to say anything at all.

“I have no comment on that situation.” says Phil Pannell, a member of the executive board. "They asked everybody not to talk to the press because they are working on a statement. They haven’t arrived at a consensus.”

The Ward 8 Dems have mainly busied themselves over a more pressing matter. They're focused now on possibly removing its president, Jacque Patterson. His offense? Giving an interview about the Ward 8 Dems' deliberations over Barry.

“Well, you know I would really like to respond to you but I can’t," Patterson says of his organization's MIA status on the Barry matter. "The last time I made a statement, my executive board had a very, very hard time with me….I’m the president of Ward 8 Dems, and I can’t even make a statement that we’re deliberating…Nothing’s happening at this point. Now the focus is on me.... I have a group of people who are basically saying that—I guess—they don’t want a statement. They have effectively shut down our ability to even address the situation.”

Is this at all embarrassing? "Let me just say yes. Yes," Patterson replies.

*file photo by Darrow Montgomery.

Whether you're a member of the D.C.  Council or one of Ward 8's ANC Commissioners, you have rendered an opinion about the conduct of Councilmember Marion S. Barry, as laid out in the Bennett Report.

Yet one constituency has yet to speak out on the politician's ethics: Jewelry merchants.

Their voice must be heard in this matter, given the centrality of their wares to the latest Barry flare-up. As City Desk outlined, Barry had given his former girlfriend Donna Watts-Brighthaupt gifts–clothes, yes, sundry items, yes. And jewelry!

"Gifts," in this context, is a kind construction. What the councilmember  actually did was secure $15,000 in contract work for her. Then, after purchasing the items, he made her repay him out of the contract funds. Was this a kickback? Barry claimed to Bennett investigators that those gifts were really just, um, loans.

Kickbacks, loans, repayments, repossessions, whatever—the gallant men of the jewelry industry are saying that it all runs counter to their core values. “I just think the whole thing is fishy," says Jonathan Mervis, the digital strategist for Mervis Diamond Importers. "I hate to be quick to judgment, but I don’t think there’s real commitment there."

Local jewelers say Barry violated all kinds of relationship ethics.  They've never heard of anyone giving jewelry, and then claiming it as a loan.

David Boone, vice president of Boone & Sons, explains that when jewelry is exchanged it's supposed to be a deep, maybe even relationship-saving, moment. "It makes the guy feel good and hopefully the gal feels good or guy-guy or gal-gal whatever the case is. I always tell people, if you take guilt out of the equation, there’s going to be a lot of jewelers out of business. Guilt has something to do with it, but love has more to do with it.”

Boone says that hypothetically Barry's jewelry-as-loan is a really bad boyfriend move. "That's a message that you shouldn't be together," he says. It's so bad, he's not quite buying it.

The loan? Well, Boone says: "That doesn't make sense."

Says Mervis: “You’d have to ask why. Why did he not say this from the outset? He has to have a reason. Maybe he lost his job. Maybe there’s a reason why his portfolio went to nothing and he can’t afford it. This girl shouldn’t be quick to jump to conclusions. But she should certainly start asking some questions.”

“It defies the meaning of gift," Mervis adds. "If you give a gift and you later ask for money then you never gave a gift.”

*file photo by Darrow Montgomery.