Editorials and Opinions

Georgetowner • July 26, 2011

We recognize that Georgetown University, as a world-class educational institution, makes positive contributions to our neighborhoods. Unfortunately, being the University’s neighbor also has major disadvantages, such as group-house noise, alcohol-fueled student misbehavior, traffic and parking congestion, trash, and blighted, unsafe housing stock. Georgetown University’s 2010 expansion plan promises more of the same.

GU’s plan proposes to increase enrollment by approximately 3,400 students from its 2009 level, but fails to provide any additional significant on-campus housing. It is clear GU will continue to rely on the existing homes in the surrounding neighborhoods — Georgetown, Burleith, Glover Park, and Foxhall — to house a substantial portion of its student body. This is unconscionable, irresponsible, and threatens the viability of our communities.

Other negative aspects of its plan include the construction of new mixed-use buildings in West Georgetown, despite the protests of residents and the accompanying increase in traffic through our already overburdened neighborhoods. Our communities are also concerned about the environmental impact of the proposed 83-foot-tall utility plant chimney, the proposed new loop road, the roof over Yates Sportscenter, and the alignment of 38th Street with GU’s main campus and hospital entrance.

Georgetown University and President DeGioia have failed to effectively manage off-campus student behavior. Disorderly conduct, late night noise, and trash violations resulting in rodent infestation all fundamentally degrade our quality of life. The absence of on-campus housing in the proposed plan assures continuation of the town-gown stalemate that has defined our relations with the University for far too long.

An outpouring of concern by citizens has galvanized neighborhood associations representing the communities most affected by GU’s intransigence. We stand together in opposing the GU plan.

We would like GU to honor its pledge to be a good neighbor, one of the 2010 plan’s own guiding principles. We intend to hold GU to its responsibility to comply with the DC Zoning Regulations, which provide that a college or university shall be located so that it is not likely to become objectionable to neighboring property because of noise, traffic, number of students, or other objectionable conditions.

Our residents are joined in the fight for their neighborhoods. We expect Mayor Fenty and Councilmember Jack Evans and other councilmembers to support our efforts. D.C.’s Office of Planning and D.C.’s Zoning Commission need to require GU to comply with D.C.’s zoning regulations and help us protect our communities.

The Burleith Citizens Association, Citizens Association of Georgetown, Foxhall Community Citizens Association, Glover Park Citizens Association and Hillandale Homeowners Association

For a point-by-point rebuttal to GU’s recent letter to the community visit www.cagtown.org.

Gary Tischler •

-Glenn Beck is coming to town. So is Sarah Palin. They’re bringing about 300,000 folks with them for a major conservative rally called “Restoring Honor”, a fevered brain child of Beck’s originally meant to be about honoring American servicemen—and who can argue with that—but which has now enlarged the scope of events to Beck’s vision of America’s future. This Saturday, 10 am -1 pm, no signs or guns allowed.

Beck gave his own estimate of the number of people likely to come in requesting a permit. Which he got.

If that many show up, you can bet pretty much how most of them—including Beck and Palin—feel about the 9/11 mosque that’s supposed to be going up a shy two blocks from the hallowed ground of where the Twin Towers once stood: No. Absolutely not.

One of the rallying cries over the mosque controversy is that it’s an example of massive insensitivity on the part of the planners, and anybody who supports the idea, including President Barack Obama – who in any case said he didn’t actually give his approval for the project, but just wants to support freedom of religion. You can’t argue with that.

On the matter of insensitivity…let’s give a big raspberry for Mr. Beck. He’s holding his massive rally on the mall on the anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Beck claims he didn’t realize that it was the same date until it was too late, and the plans had already been made.

Perhaps he learned it on the nightly news.

But in any case, Beck says he has a dream, too, and that this is very much about civil rights and that he now carries the mantle of American visionary. It was not reported whether he cried or not while explaining himself. He did not mention the mosque at the time.

Here are some things about the mosque issue. New York Mayor Bloomberg supports it. So do many people who also believe in religious freedom and freedom in general, and whose beliefs are every bit as vehement as the anti-mosque crowd.

Now you can understand – if not necessarily agree with – the relatives and victims of 9/11 on their stand. They don’t’ want a mosque there in that proximity (two blocks) because it would be an insult to them and the victims. But like a lot of things tend to do, this thing has gotten a little out of hand.
Ask a basic question: how far away should this mosque (actually an Islamic Cultural Center supporting Inter-faith activities, according to its supporters) be? If not two blocks, how many? If not lower Manhattan, where? New Jersey? Florida? Well, no. They don’t want mosques there either. Or in Tennessee or in various places in the West and Midwest. These folks are saying: Be afraid. Be very afraid of the other.

Maybe they needn’t worry. Of the millions of dollars the proposed center would cost, only around $15,000 has been raised, which makes its appearance unlikely any year soon. And the Inman of the center is in any case a Sufi, the least militant, the most tolerant sect of Islam that exists.
But it’s too late for that. The anti-mosque movement — which is what it appears to be — is spreading like wildfire, which is perhaps what you might call an intended consequence of the actions of the opposition.

the Georgetowner Editorial Board •

-Geez. Can’t Mehmet Kocak just give it a rest?

Rumors, arresting as the scent of melted mozzarella, have seeped out and spread fast among
neighbors that the former owner of the irreparably besmirched Philly Pizza has again filed papers for an operating license at the same location he was forced to board up just six months ago. At the time, Kocak so vehemently defended his rights as a restaurateur he began to seem a kind of self-styled paladin of pizza.

You can’t say he doesn’t get points for effort. However, it’s one thing to stick to your guns for a time, and another to remain totally intractable when backed into a corner — literally — by residents on all sides. When the neighbors are inviting the mayor out to see you off, isn’t it time to throw in the towel?

Kocak maintains that this time around, his proposal is for a different, more innocuous sort of operation — a kind of hot sandwich shop — but the signs are ominous, most notably his request for a 550-degree conveyor oven three feet wide. You want pepperoni with that?

At the height of the fiasco earlier this year, we sat down with Kocak to make sure we understood his side of the story. His argument — essentially that he was being singled out — was a little maudlin, a little put-upon, but on the whole well reasoned and worth a listen. That, however, was before an organized coalition of neighbors, ANC commissioners and city officials, including the attorney general, mayor and DCRA chief, ordered him out. In the process, he huffed, dragged his feet and even operated on a suspended license until he was threatened with jail time. In a word, Kocak played bad politics in a town where politics matters.

Now, to put it bluntly, we’re as tired of this perpetual debacle as the households of Potomac Street. Exactly why Kocak would want to rekindle a neighborhood feud and further strain relations between the University and neighbors is a mystery, but it seems more and more to have to do with a misguided and self-interested pursuit of profit. While we applaud the growth of small businesses in Georgetown, it must take a back seat to the welfare of its residents, without exception. Philly, or whatever its latest genesis, has worn out its welcome.

Veena Trehan •

Washingtonians live in an environmentally friendly city. New buildings meet green standards, transit ridership is very high, residents use a mix of renewable energy and recycling to increase sustainability. Locals, who value their health and the environment, shop at bustling organic grocery stores and farmers markets. D.C. residents are leaders in “green” living.

They are also horrified by the ongoing oil spill that has shattered lives and the ecosystem of the Gulf of Mexico. President Obama and environmental leaders have embraced this leadership moment, calling for an end to foreign (or all) oil dependence in as few as two decades — a reversal of a 15-year trend of more driving, flat fuel economy, higher greenhouse gas emissions, and more complicated and risky oil extraction. Local residents must also channel their outrage into better choices for our planet.

In the short term, Washingtonians can reduce their carbon footprint by carpooling or grouping errands by location. In the long term, they can choose to live in walkable communities or buy more energy-efficient cars. When they fill their gas tanks, they must not decide, as usual, on the cheapest or closest option. Instead, they must select an oil company based on its environmental, employee, and regional impact. They must also disregard oil company “greenwashing” efforts, such as BP’s “Beyond Petroleum” campaign, which overhyped small renewable energy efforts, and Shell ads showing a pristine marine sanctuary supported through only a few thousand dollars.

A wealth of truly relevant public information on environmental, safety, lobbying, and spill records can help consumers pick a pump. There are some excellent sources:

– One of the most comprehensive is the Sierra Club’s 2007 article called “Pick Your Poison,” which records human rights or environmental abuses, companies’ stances on global warming and green initiatives. The information is shocking — it details huge pipeline and tanker spills, murdered activists, large fines and contaminated water. It also ranks the oil companies on their environmental impact, with Sunoco coming in first (“Top of the Barrel”); Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron, Valero Energy Company, and Citgo next (“Middle of the Barrel”); then ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips (“Bottom of the Barrel”); and BP (dishonorable mention, as of 2010).

– Federal government records from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Minerals Management Service, and the Coast Guard forecast and track the impact of oil company activities. Consumers generally can’t easily search these Web sites and compare companies. But a handful of nonprofits are doing the dirty work. For example, a Center for Public Integrity study showed two BP refineries of the 55 that are now federally inspected accounted for almost all (97 percent) of the past three years’ flagrant workplace violations.

– Community stakeholders and environmental groups communicate on the Web about local issues with oil extraction, processing, and transportation at sites such as www.chevrontoxico.com and www.oilwatchdog.org.

Sorting through this information will likely become even easier. Web and iPhone applications that point consumers to the cheapest and/or closest gas stations are being released to give consumers access to this information. These apps might also have consumers check priorities — such safety records over renewable energy initiatives — and push out rankings or more information.

Washington area residents care about the environment, but still drive an average of around 22 miles per day. They must think twice before they fuel up. Local drivers must read through available oil company information and stay up to date on Web and phone applications. It’s one of many critical ways to care for people, pelicans (other wildlife too!) and our planet.

Jeff Malet •

In the time it takes you to read this sentence, the people of the United States will have used up (forever) 100,000 gallons of oil.

The most important well ever drilled was in a remote section of northwestern Pennsylvania in 1859 by “Colonel” Edwin Drake. This may have been the first successful well ever drilled for the sole purpose of finding petroleum, and began the international search for oil that eventually changed the way we live.

Today hydrocarbons power our economy. They provide the raw material for fertilizers to put food on our table and for the plastic containers that we drink from. They also drain our funds, enrich our enemies by bankrolling terrorism, corrupt our political system and foul our environment. Much like the whale oil of old, petroleum is a depleting resource. Petroleum, coal and natural gas (the “fossil fuels”) are forms of stored energy from trillions of plants and animals that were buried before dinosaurs roamed the Earth. Of course, new oil is still being formed today in some parts of the world, but you might have to wait another 150 million years to turn it into something you could use in your car.

Oil is only worth something when its final value is more than what it costs to produce it. As we drill deeper, the costs of extraction go up exponentially. In the case of deep offshore drilling, very little of the difference between revenues and costs accrues to our benefit. Unlike countries that have already nationalized their petroleum industry (like Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Libya) only a relatively small portion goes to our government in the form of royalties and taxes. The rest accrues to the benefit of largely foreign shareholders who often recycle that money back into our own economy by buying even larger interests in American assets like other oil properties, real estate and shares of American banks.

Many of us have heard that the U.S. is sitting on enough domestic reserves of gas and coal to last centuries. We are not told that much of the gas is too deep and the coal too remote to produce it without heavy subsidy. Natural gas development requires substantial investment in infrastructure spending. And, after centuries of mining, our shallow coal resources have been heavily exploited. The recent Massey Energy explosion in West Virginia brought renewed focus to the dangers of deep coal mining.

Deep water provides its own set of challenges. Typically below 1700 feet, offshore platforms cannot physically rest on the sea floor and instead must float on the surface. By now, we all know what problems can be created when things go wrong thousands of feet below.

Whenever we suffer through an oil boycott, a fall in the value of our currency, a terrorist attack or a disastrous oil spill, we must again remind ourselves that we have to act now to conserve. Alternative forms of energy such as solar and wind are simply too undeveloped to have an immediate impact, though efforts in those directions must be encouraged. Nuclear energy is burdened by its own set of problems — exorbitant costs, the risks of an accident or terrorist attack, the threat of proliferation and the challenge of disposing of the nuclear waste to name but a few. A nuclear accident will make the Gulf spill look tame. Unlike oil pollution, deadly radiation cannot even be seen or smelled. Then there is the issue of uranium depletion. The best ores of uranium have been mined, leaving mainly low-quality ores left to exploit. And with a country the size of ours (compared to the size of France, which has an active nuclear program) it would take a massive investment in many dozens of new plants taking many years to make even a small dent in energy availability. Some experts think that hydrogen will form the basic energy infrastructure that will power future societies, replacing today’s fossil fuels, but that vision probably won’t happen until far in the future.

There are obvious things we can do personally to save energy by changing our habits. Others, such as increased mileage standards and light rail systems, can only be accomplished though government mandate. Higher taxes on energy will spur a better allocation of resources. The higher cost of gasoline in Europe has led to the widespread use of lighter fuel efficient vehicles and greater utilization of public transportation. Higher taxes on energy use might be acceptable if offset by tax cuts elsewhere. Higher prices for petroleum products will inevitably curb consumption. Would it not be better that the proceeds from higher prices be directed to our own treasury rather than to foreign entities?

The unemployed are another wasted resource. As a temporary measure during the Great Depression, FDR created the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) to provide jobs to millions while providing natural resource conservation on public lands in every state. During that time, volunteers planted nearly 3 billion trees to help reforest America and constructed more than 800 parks that would become the foundation of our state parks today.

We can and should vote for candidates who promise to do something to promote conservation and the environment. We have all heard the mantra “Drill Baby Drill” from the likes of a certain political figure (I won’t embarrass her by mentioning her name). How many times must we be reminded? The U.S. today consumes a fourth of the world’s supply of oil, almost 3 times that of number two contender, China. As the populations of the developing world continue to trade in their bicycles for cars, the price of oil is certain to rise. Comprehensive climate and energy legislation must be given top priority — now.

There are no easy solutions. Wrenching lifestyle changes are going to happen anyway. Perhaps these can be greatly lessened by our immediate attention.

The author, a former oil industry analyst for a major mutual fund company, is a frequent contributor of photographs to The Georgetowner and The Downtowner.