C4
KR
KLMNO Local Opinions WRITE FOR US
washingtonpost.com/localopinions localopinions@washingtonpost.com
CLOSE TO HOME THE DISTRICT Time for Ms. Norton to go
At first glance at Eleanor Holmes Norton’s July 25 Local Opinions piece, “D.C. voting rights: Where we’ve been, where we’re going,” I thought Ms. Norton was reciting events during her tenure because she was getting ready to retire. Of course, that was wishful thinking. She is in complete reelection mode. The principal purpose of Ms. Norton’s position as a nonvoting
delegate in the U.S. House of Representatives is to secure voting representation in Congress for the citizens of the District of Columbia. Sadly, during the past 20 years that Ms. Norton has been in office, 600,000 Washingtonians continue to be disenfranchised. Ms. Norton spent the last 17 years pursuing the single congressional seat as the preferred option for governance in the District. The most recent bill passed the Senate, but was effectively killed by a gun amendment that would have repealed most of the District’s gun-control laws. We are still the only city in the United States where its citizens are without a vote in Congress, yet we continue to be subjected to violations of two core principles of our republican form of government: taxation in the absence of representation and being governed without our consent. Now, Ms. Norton says that if reelected she will introduce a number of bills to obtain voting representation, including one on statehood. Left unsaid is the record compiled by Ms. Norton during her tenure: She has failed to produce voting rights, and we are in the same place we were in when Ms. Norton was first elected to office back in 1990. Ms. Norton’s column gave the impression that she does not accept any of the blame for not delivering on voting rights. Recently 241 D.C. public school teachers were fired for poor performance after a year. Ms. Norton has been on the job for 20 years and has not delivered. It’s time for D.C. voters to emulate our schools chancellor, Michelle A. Rhee, and hold Ms. Norton accountable for her failures. Douglass Sloan, Washington
The writer is running for the city’s delegate seat in the House of Representatives.
Local Opinions, a place for commentary about where we live, is looking for submissions of 300 to 500 words on timely local topics. Submissions must include name, e-mail address, street address and phone number, and they will be edited for brevity and clarity. To submit your article, please go to
washingtonpost.com/localopinions.
NEXT WEEK’S TOPIC Tell us your story of dealing with the summer storms.
RICHARD SARLES WASHINGTON Changing the safety culture at Metro
Local Blog Network
6voices.washingtonpost.com/local-opinions/
Some of the region’s best bloggers share work on the All Opinions Are Local blog. Below are posts from the past week.
Virginia politicians protest too much Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates’s announcement of his plans to close the Norfolk-based U.S. Joint Forces Command, end or change the jobs of 6,100 people and save $704 million a year, has brought howls of protest from Virginia’s elected officials. Gov. Bob McDonnell held news conferences with U.S. Reps. Randy
Forbes and Glenn Nye and Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim. U.S. Sens. Mark Warner and Jim Webb, both Democrats, have likewise protested. Virginia has been more than spoiled with defense toys and jobs since Sept. 11, 2001, and the state had already been a huge recipient of federal defense dollars. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are approaching or have surpassed the length of the Vietnam conflict. New threats probably will remain asymmetrical, i.e. terrorists rather than battalions of Russian tanks or squadrons of jet fighters. The level of defense spending that has so greatly benefited Virginia cannot be sustained. It is ironic that the politicians, especially Republicans, who are
beating up on Obama for blowing out budgets, fight and scream when they face real cuts that will help achieve what they supposedly are after.
—Peter Galuszka, Bacon’s Rebellion Whining or just reasonable angst?
According to my Local Blog Network colleague Peter Galuszka, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, Sens. Mark Warner and Jim Webb and Reps. Randy Forbes and Glenn Nye all seem a bit like whiny children in their protest of military cuts. Perhaps this characterization would fit if McDonnell, Warner and the rest were grousing about closing the Marine Corps base in Quantico or the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in McLean. But we’re talking about Norfolk. Unemployment in Norfolk sits at 9.8 percent, slightly higher than
the national average and considerably higher than the statewide 7.1 percent. Thousands of layoffs in the area could send cracks through the local
economy that might just equal tremors up to Northern Virginia. Elected officials — and especially fiscally conservative Republicans
—face charges of hypocrisy when they decry government spending but welcome federal dollars to their districts. But the announced defense cuts could illustrate to conservatives the very thing they fear: that domestic spending will use up dollars that should instead be spent on core government functions. What did Virginia officials exhibit last week? I say that it was reasonable angst, not dissatisfied griping. —Paige Winfield Cunningham, Old Dominion Watchdog
At Metro, there is no higher val- ue than safety, and we are taking cooperation with safety oversight agencies to a new level. Last Mon- day’s highly productive meeting between the Metro board of direc- tors and the National Transporta- tion Safety Board about the NTSB’s safety recommendations after the June 22, 2009, Red Line accident demonstrated our com- mitment to safety and our recog- nition that Metro’s success de- pends on constant improvement. Reorienting our safety culture will require an enduring commit- ment, from the top all the way through the organization. The change will take years. However, we have begun putting the foun- dation in place through, among other actions, a specific and mea- surable response to each of the NTSB’s recommendations. What is being done? First, be- cause the cornerstone of any suc- cessful safety program is an ability to identify and prevent hazards before they occur, we have added staff to our safety department and established a direct reporting line from the chief safety officer to the general manager. The Metro board has also directed that the chief safety officer report monthly on our progress, including respon- siveness to oversight agencies such as the NTSB. To set bench- marks, a safety culture survey was recently completed by 97 percent of Metro employees. To further enlist the help of our employees — they are our eyes and ears on safety — we have es- tablished an anonymous hotline for reporting concerns, while the board has reinforced our whistle- blower protection policy. We have also expanded safety training and initiated discussions with our
JAMES M. THRESHER FOR THE WASHINGTON POST
Metro’s board met last week to discuss safety recommendations made since the 2009 Red Line crash that killed nine, shown above.
largest union on how to encourage reporting of near misses without punitive consequences.
At the same time, we are put- ting tools in place to identify haz- ards and monitor our progress in responding to them. We are devel- oping a Safety Management Sys- tem to track all safety-related in- cidents, investigations and correc- tive actions.
While we strengthen our safety
culture, we have taken dozens of other actions, many of which com- ply with Federal Transit Adminis- tration (FTA) and NTSB recom- mendations. Among the most sig- nificant, we have awarded a contract to satisfy our top safety priority (and a recommendation from the NTSB) to replace the 1000 series rail cars, the oldest in our fleet. The new cars not only
feature advanced crashworthiness technology but also represent a tremendous upgrade, with addi- tional amenities such as in-car digital information displays, new flooring, security cameras, re- freshed interiors and overhead handles. Notably, we completed retrofitting all of our 1000 series cars with rollback protection last month; we had already complete- ly retrofitted the 2000, 3000 and 6000 series cars. Altogether that’s about three-quarters of our fleet. Our new safety culture cannot
be created without a commensu- rate financial commitment. The WMATA board anticipated this by including $6.9 million in Metro’s operating budget to address FTA audit recommendations and to provide additional drug-testing capabilities. The board also estab-
lished a $5 billion, six-year capital spending plan, the largest capital budget since the completion of the rail system, to ensure that we can improve equipment and infra- structure. And the board dedi- cated more than $30 million over the next three years in Metro’s capital budget to address the NTSB’s recommendations. Further changes are happening fast to comply with the NTSB rec- ommendations. We are replacing all Alstom GRS-generation track circuit modules, part of Metro’s automatic train control system, that were implicated in the Red Line crash. The Metro board has hired a consultant to analyze our auto- matic train control system, identi- fy all potential areas of failure and propose solutions. Senior staff will review data from onboard train recorders monthly, together with Local 689 members. In September, our sen- ior safety committee will review our progress on all open corrective action plans and the findings from safety audits. Finally, we will make sure that all our rail cars have onboard event recorders and make im- provements of all onboard record- ers part of our preventive mainte- nance. In the past year, Metro has faced a number of challenges, and there are more to come. But we also have forged better partner- ships with oversight agencies, and, with their help, and our board’s leadership, we are on a path to improving safety and serv- ice reliability.
The writer is general manager of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
SUNDAY, AUGUST 15, 2010
BOB BRINK ARLINGTON Privatization: Not as simple as ABC
It’s 1934. Franklin Roosevelt is president, Prohibition has just been repealed, and Virginia (along with a number of other states) au- thorizes the sale of bottled liquor through a chain of state-owned and -operated retail outlets. They’re called ABC stores (for Al- coholic Beverage Control), and the emphasis is on the “C.” Now, more than 75 years later,
Gov. Robert F. McDonnell (R) is proposing to sell off the state ABC stores to private interests. He promises to use the proceeds of privatization to provide a one-time windfall for Virginia’s cash-starved transportation system, and he has embarked on a series of town hall meetings across the common- wealth to promote the idea. Privatization shouldn’t be a tough sell. Nobody considers the sale of distilled spirits to be a “core function of government,” and rais- ing a little revenue for roads and transit (without having to make any of the tough decisions that a meaningful transportation solu- tion would require) is especially appealing in the current economy. But before many of my col- leagues and I can sign onto ABC privatization, we need answers to a lot of questions. Here are a few of
them: 1. Could privatization kill a cash
cow? Every year, ABC pumps tens of millions of dollars into the state budget — including $65 million earmarked for alcoholism treat- ment and prevention. We need ironclad assurances that this rev- enue will continue to flow into the treasury to help support Virginia’s health care, schools and other vital services. 2. What will privatization do to our neighborhoods? Privatization is likely to bring a large increase in the number of stores — from the current 332 to 800, 1,000 or more. Those new locations could have a severe impact on local communi- ties, requiring greater expendi- tures on public safety and social services. In addition, the ABC stores operate under tight restric- tions on advertising. If the new pri- vate enterprises are allowed to hawk their wares like other busi- nesses, with bright lights and bill- boards, will this affect quality of life?
3. How would privatization af-
fect existing ABC operations? On average, ABC employees are 47 years old and have worked for the state for almost 12 years. That means they’re vested in the state
retirement system and are starting to think about retirement not too far down the road. If they lose their jobs through privatization, we have an obligation to treat them fairly — but that may cost millions of dollars. Further, all but a hand- ful of ABC outlets are in store- fronts leased by the state. The new license holders don’t have to stay in those locations. If they decide to move, will privatization lead to even more empty retail space on Main Streets and in shopping centers?
4. Finally, is the payoff from pri-
vatization worth the price? Given the concerns about what we might lose by selling off the ABC stores, we need to look carefully at what we stand to gain. Nobody really knows how much Virginia would net by auctioning the right to sell bottled liquor. The McDonnell administration has used a figure of $300 million to $800 million; his predecessor, Mark Warner, called that projec- tion “wildly optimistic.” But even if privatization is so successful that it raises $500 million, what will that “windfall” buy us? Not much, it turns out: It would fund a single mega-interchange such as the one at Interstate 66
and Route 29 in Gainesville (the state is spending $435 million on the Gainesville improvements); widen a few miles of urban roads from four to six lanes (just 3.7 miles of Route 50 in Fairfax and Loudoun counties is costing us $75 million); or build about a third of the 55-mile Route 460 project downstate (it’s estimated that the entire stretch will run $1.5 billion to $2 billion). The Commonwealth Transpor-
tation Board’s six-year improve- ment program identifies $7.8 bil- lion in “essential” highway, rail and transit projects that are needed be- tween now and 2016. At best, the ABC “windfall” would fund barely a tenth of them. It’s a drop in the bucket. The old English proverb cau- tions us that “there’s many a slip ’twixt the cup and the lip.” Before we can toast the privatization of li- quor stores in Virginia, there’s many a question to be answered.
The writer, a Democrat, represents the 48th District in the Virginia House of Delegates. He is a member of the Governor’s Commission on Government Reform and Restructuring, which is considering the privatization issue.
MARTHA ROSS WASHINGTON How to fix the D.C. summer jobs program
It’s Groundhog Day in August: another hot summer and another contentious D.C. Council hearing on the summer jobs program. It played out again a few weeks ago when the council rejected Mayor Adrian M. Fenty’s last-minute re- quest to extend the program be- yond the six weeks authorized in the FY 2010 Budget Support Act. Never mind that the seven-day ex- tension would add $4 million to a program already over budget by about $7 million. It’s time to break the cycle. Summer jobs are not the only way to connect young people to jobs and training, and they shouldn’t be the sole policy focus. We also need to make our summer jobs program manageable and predict-
able. That means targeting enroll- ment for a specific number of young people, making quality — not size — the most important benchmark and putting improved management and financial sys- tems in place. Then we can broad- en the debate about youth em- ployment to include year-round programs, internships, and career and technical education at the K-12 and post-secondary levels. But back to Groundhog Day.
The council authorized $22.8 mil- lion for the 2010 summer jobs program. The council also stip- ulated that the program should last no longer than six weeks and serve 10,000 to 21,000 partici- pants. As it has for the past three years, the Fenty administration
decided to serve all comers, which resulted in enrollment of about 20,000. But with a budget of $22.8 million, the Office of the Chief Fi- nancial Officer calculated that the city could operate a program of that size for only 31
⁄2 weeks. None-
theless, the city planned an eight- week program, reprogramming money internally and requesting an extension. Advocates for the homeless report that the money came from funds that the D.C. De- partment of Human Services had planned to use for homeless services. The summer jobs program has
worthy goals, and its manage- ment has improved under Joe Walsh, director of the Depart- ment of Employment Services
(DES). But its operation is di- vorced from budgetary reality and is more driven by size than quality concerns. The reprogramming and the extension request com- promise the integrity of the budg- eting process. They ignore the spending priorities agreed upon in a public process. And they put public officials and stakeholders in a bind: a budget debate that pits homeless services against youth has taken a wrong turn. The city can do better. DES needs to beef up its planning and oversight to meet the needs of both job sites and young people. Whatever the program’s size, the agency needs to ensure the follow- ing: That there are enough job sites
for participants, and that each job site has a clear work plan vetted by DES. No one gets paid for doing nothing or gets make-work as- signments, and all participants learn new skills. That youth are matched to their job sites based on an assess- ment of their hard and soft skills. Some sites want to provide basic skills enrichment and work-readi- ness training. Others, usually pri- vate-sector employers, want some- one who is ready to go and needs less coaching. That there are clear standards for youth and job sites, and that both receive orientation, support and oversight throughout the summer. That managerial and financial
systems are sufficient to handle registration, job site assignment, timekeeping, payroll and trouble- shooting. Every summer, Employ- ment Services has to dramatically ramp up its operations in a short time. This is not an insurmount- able problem but appears to make it more likely that logistics swamp quality concerns. Rather than building a program around unlimited enrollment, the city should deliver on its promise to provide meaningful work op- portunities and help young people build skills — and stay within its budget.
The writer is the deputy director of Greater Washington Research at the Brookings Institution.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148