 |
Mount Pleasant DC Forum Discussion about the Mount Pleasant Neighborhood
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
denisew
Joined: 25 Mar 2005 Posts: 162
|
Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:05 am Post subject: ANC resolution |
|
|
I would just like to point out that I did not find out until tonight at 5:30 that the ANC was proposing a factually inaccurate resolution attacking me in my position at DDOT. I was out of town for two weeks-this las week was my firs week back and we were innundated with work. Since everyone knows my e-mail, a note perhaps?
I have participated in any Bestway actions only three times over the past two years and all of them recently. One was to make a notation of the Pubic Space Committee Order into the DCRA permitting database. Two was to attend a meeting at the Mayor's office with my supervisor that Mr. Choi was not at and in that environment I was not a decision maker and three to attend a field visit with my supervisor and a number of staff at my supervisors direction. I made no decisions and left the field early due to the excessive heat. One permit to Mr. Choi was released at that meeting.
As far as I know DDOT (that would have been the PSMA main office) did respond the the ANC regarding it resolution for DDOT not to take action against Bestway. As I did not write it I cannot state for certainty it was mailed but its content was to the effect that enforcement, whether it be housing, law or public space, is within the sole discrection of the Executive Branch as part of the separation of powers.
I would not have attended the ANC meeting at any regard since it was National Night out and I was also having the rare pleasure of meeting a friend from NYC and a mutual friend in town from Nicaragua.
I am beginning to tire of the slandarous and false attacks against my charactor by certain members of the ANC. I also am angered by the accusation and the innuendo that I violated a personnel regulation, which could also be a criminal offense. Simply because one holds an ANC office does not protect one reckless disregard of the truth.
Denise |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 Posts: 4399 Location: 19th & Lamont
|
Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 9:46 am Post subject: Re: ANC resolution |
|
|
| denisew wrote: | I am beginning to tire of the slandarous and false attacks against my charactor by certain members of the ANC. I also am angered by the accusation and the innuendo that I violated a personnel regulation, which could also be a criminal offense. Simply because one holds an ANC office does not protect one reckless disregard of the
truth. |
The resolution (which I will post later today) does not charge Denise with intentional violation of personnel regulations, but states that her participation in the Bestway proceedings, however brought about, is inherently contrary to DC personnel regulations. Here is that regulation:
1803 Responsibilities of Employees
1803.1 An employee shall avoid action, whether or not specifically prohibited by this chapter, which might result in, or create the appearance of, the following:
(b) Giving preferential treatment to any person;
(d) Losing complete independence or impartiality;
(f) Affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the integrity of government.
-- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dwight
Joined: 27 Jun 2005 Posts: 310
|
Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am confused, what "action" did she take that the ANC is objecting to?
-- Dwight |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 Posts: 4399 Location: 19th & Lamont
|
Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 10:41 am Post subject: ANC resolution |
|
|
| Dwight wrote: | I am confused, what "action" did she take that the ANC is objecting to?
-- Dwight |
See the ANC resolution, which I am posting now. -- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PRN
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 114
|
Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't even have to see the resolution to recognize this for what it is - a petty ad hominen attack on someone in the neighborhood often at odds with the current ANC's agenda. Say what you will about Denise W, she is consistent in seeking enforcement of public space regulations in Mt Pleasant and I assume elsewhere - that is her job - you may not agree with the regulations involved but it is clear that Bestway has been in violation of a plethora of public space rules for years.
So - since you can't defend Bestway on the merits you are going to attack a DC government employee - because she happens to vocally disagree with you on many other issues in the neighborhood - what about the underlying violations - can you argue that anything DPW has done is not legally or administratively appropriate - whether you agree with it or not?
Since you so often speak as a "scientist" I will speak as an attorney.
Simply disagreeing with you and the ANC regarding issues in the neighborhood - even regarding Bestway - does not create an appearance of impropriety - unless the employee is applying or attempting to apply rules and regulations against a business, in this case Bestway, in a manner inconsistent with their application in other areas of the city or neighborhood. There is not any evidence of this here. In addition - there are plenty of people in the neighborhood, myself included, who have complained about Bestway to the appropriate city authorities - in other words - it is not remotely possible that Denise W is solely responsible for bringing Bestway issues to the attention of DDOT.
So why is the ANC to casting aspersions on the work of a DC city employee who lives in the neighborhood? Unless you have evidence that Denise has singled Bestway out for different treatment you have no case. In fact, if she is aware of a public space violation her job likely requires that she report it. The more likely explanation for this act is a clumsy attempt by the ANC to cloud the issues with regard to Bestway's failure to comply with city regulations by implying that somehow the attention brought to the establishments violations is improper.
Jack, this is no different than those folks you complained about for attacking you over the public space/parking issue next to your house or Commissioner Edwards for the assessment of his apartment building. When the ANC takes actions like this it diminishes its credibility.
Lance Alworth |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 Posts: 4399 Location: 19th & Lamont
|
Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:57 pm Post subject: The Bestway |
|
|
| PRN wrote: | Since you so often speak as a "scientist" I will speak as an attorney.
Simply disagreeing with you and the ANC regarding issues in the neighborhood - even regarding Bestway - does not create an appearance of impropriety - unless the employee is applying or attempting to apply rules and regulations against a business, in this case Bestway, in a manner inconsistent with their application in other areas of the city or neighborhood. There is not any evidence of this here. In addition - there are plenty of people in the neighborhood, myself included, who have complained about Bestway to the appropriate city authorities - in other words - it is not remotely possible that Denise W is solely responsible for bringing Bestway issues to the attention of DDOT. |
Lance, Denise was advised long ago that she should recuse herself from any dealings with Bestway, because of her proximity to the location, and her close association with certain neighbors who have long been hostile to the Bestway. That creates "the appearance of . . . losing complete independence or impartiality". Whether Denise has in fact attempted "to apply rules and regulations against a business, in this case Bestway, in a manner inconsistent with their application in other areas of the city" is irrelevant to the case, and does not have to be proven, or even be true, in order to confirm "the appearance" of partiality.
Lars Etzkorn made it quite clear to Denise that she should stay out of the Bestway matter, because of the appearance of impropriety. Unfortunately, he has moved on to another post, and his successor failed to follow that policy, despite explicit advice from the ANC that she should do so.
This is the guidance in the District's Personnel Manual:
1803.1 An employee shall avoid action, whether or not specifically prohibited by this chapter, which might result in, or create the appearance of, the following:
(b) Giving preferential treatment to any person;
(d) Losing complete independence or impartiality;
(f) Affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the integrity of government.
The appearance of giving preferential treatment to Laurie Collins, and being predisposed to be hostile to the Bestway, exists. Denise should have assigned this task to a Public Space officer who was not from this neighborhood, and was not associated with the disputes of the past.
If the case against the Bestway was good, then it would have held up on its own merits, and the present judgment would not be tainted by this appearance of bias.
-- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dwight
Joined: 27 Jun 2005 Posts: 310
|
Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I find it interesting that using legal means to try to get a negligent business to fix past problems and to protest new activities that are open to public input is termed "hostile" behavior.
Are the police hostile if they enforce "turn right on green arrow only" law?
-- Dwight |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jack
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 Posts: 4399 Location: 19th & Lamont
|
Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 11:24 am Post subject: Bestway/Zion Holdings public space permit application |
|
|
| Dwight wrote: | I find it interesting that using legal means to try to get a negligent business to fix past problems and to protest new activities that are open to public input is termed "hostile" behavior.
Are the police hostile if they enforce "turn right on green arrow only" law?
-- Dwight |
A police officer is hostile if he carries out a personal vendetta against you. Laws must be enforced equitably and fairly, by government persons who are neutral and professional, and not driven by personal hostility to persecute particular individuals or businesses.
In this case, if you believe that the regulatory situation was clear, then any Public Space bureaucrat could have handled the task, and there would not be this appearance of favoritism and bias.
-- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Laurie
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 Posts: 739
|
Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | A police officer is hostile if he carries out a personal vendetta against you. Laws must be enforced equitably and fairly, by government persons who are neutral and professional, and not driven by personal hostility to persecute particular individuals or businesses. |
In this case, the ANC is hostile because they are carrying out a personal vendetta against Denise for absolutely no reason at all, and as well as others...
| Quote: | | If the case against the Bestway was good, then it would have held up on its own merits, and the present judgment would not be tainted by this appearance of bias. |
The Public Space Committee (PSC) was good and held up on its own merits--that decision wasn't changed. The Bestway lost. And, there were far more people involved with this case: The police, Historic Mt. Pleasant, tons of neighbors, and lawyers. Are you now accusing the PSC's decision of being tainted and that they were bribed in some way?
Again, what did Denise do? You have yet to say exactly what she did to influence anything or any body other than hearsay.
Can you please respond to these questions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|