The Jack Evans Report

Jack Evans • July 4, 2013

I voted in support of the 2014 budget this week, because it was a big step in the right direction for our city. From education and the arts to affordable housing and public safety to tax relief for seniors and all of our residents, all stakeholders in our city should feel like they did well this budget cycle. It doesn’t hurt, of course, when the chief financial officer announces a couple of days before the final vote that there will be millions of “new” dollars available to spend due to our economic recovery.
One big focus of mine is our education system. During the past couple of years, I have worked on a number of issues relating to education, such as introducing a bill to mandate that each public school have at least one full time librarian, art teacher, music teacher, and PE teacher. Despite having the highest per-pupil funding formula in the country, our schools seem to be lacking some basic resources.

Another of these basic resources is school libraries. I have heard reports of multi-million dollar school modernization projects being completed, including great new library facilities, but the libraries have no books! All school modernization projects have a built in budgetary cushion in case of cost overruns, so at the budget vote, I moved an amendment to require that excess school modernization funds at the end of a project first be used to purchase an initial circulation of library materials before being diverted to other government projects.

I also worked hard to ensure that Garrison and Francis-Stevens remained open after they were initially put on the school closure list. More recently, I fought to restore full funding for the Fillmore Arts Center, which provides arts education to many elementary students in the District. I heard from many distraught parents throughout the city when the original decision to cut funding for Fillmore was announced. Fillmore provides education in drama, music and fine art, and is a gem in the DCPS system.

Fillmore is such an asset to participating schools because it provides a breadth and depth of arts and music offerings beyond what each school could do on its own. This is also a big part of why I support government funding for the arts, in general.
Partnerships with entities like the Smithsonian and other local arts organizations fill a critical gap in the arts education available at so many of our public schools. The programs at Fillmore offer the ability for students to participate in dance and drama activities as well as art projects and music instruction, which always seem to be the first things cut in the school system. I want to thank the Chancellor for restoring this important funding.

The budget also included a number of other important education-related items, such as: $11 million to increase early-childhood program infant and toddler slots by 200 and an increase in the quality of existing infant and toddler slots by increasing the child care subsidy rate by 10%; nearly $2 million to expand the school-based mental health program; nearly $800,000 to expand the Metrobus and Metrorail subsidy to include students up to 21 years old if they are still attending high school; $4 million for a new School Technology Fund; $2.8 million to upgrade the DCStars system in the public schools; and $4 million to expand adult literacy and career and technology education programs. We still have quite a way to go to turn around a system that isn’t producing the results that we all expect, but I am encouraged by steps we are taking and the government’s continued commitment to education in this year’s budget.

Finally, I want to at least briefly mention one other budget action. At my initiative, the Council voted to reduce our sales tax from 6% to 5.75%. The sales tax is a regressive tax that the government unwisely chose to increase a couple of years ago, so I am glad to finally return it to its original rate.

Jack Evans • May 23, 2013

Beginning last Tuesday, my colleagues and I met for two full days to discuss the budget proposal currently before the Council. At these discussions, each committee chair is asked to summarize his or her proposals and then respond to questions from other councilmembers. The first day, we primarily discussed the Budget Request Act component of the budget — the “numbers” I described in my last article, such as the funding levels we are recommending for various government agencies and grants. On the second day, we discussed each committee’s Budget Support Act recommendations — the “words” that give the government the legislative authority necessary to make the numerical portion work, such as my new initiative to dedicate a portion of our existing sales tax revenue to the arts.

For the last several years, these discussions have been held in full view of video cameras for the benefit of the public. The result is a great deal more grandstanding during these discussions and less candid dialogue. The next step is a Council vote on the full proposal. Only 24 hours’ advance circulation of the report is required prior to our initial vote, and by tradition, budget reports have actually been transmitted as late as 2 a.m. for a 10 a.m. vote — not necessarily a best practice.

I am hopeful we will stick pretty close to the mayor’s initial proposal, which does a good job striking the tough balance between long- and short-term objectives, and fostering the development of our business community (and resulting tax revenue) while providing support for those in need. When all is said and done, I will be proud to vote for a budget that restores Sunday hours in our neighborhood libraries, invests $86 million in affordable housing and repeals the municipal bond tax that has created such a burden for our seniors (without raising any meaningful revenue!). Looking forward, I hope to soon be able to let you know of the mayor’s fulfillment of a commitment to me to appropriate an additional $5 million for arts funding in our city, and a further $7 million off our budget “wish list,” if incoming revenues continue to outpace projections.

Thank you, as always, for your support, and please continue to send me your ideas.

Jack Evans • May 9, 2013

As I write this article, I am settling in for a weekend of work on my committee’s budget report. The Finance & Revenue Committee, which I chair, has the responsibility for oversight of the office of our Chief Financial Officer, as well as our real property tax appeals board, the convention center, Destination D.C., and the Commission on the Arts and Humanities.

Most people picture the budget as primarily a series of numbers, but there is much more to our budget documents than that. The budget is really a policy document. It outlines our most important priorities as a government and as a city, and describes how we intend to achieve our goals. There are actually a number of “words” that go with the mayor’s budget proposal – first are the “budget books.” This six-volume set of books comprises well over 1,000 pages of descriptions of the composition and function of our government agencies. The books also describe any changes in funding and goals from the prior year. For example, I recently oversaw the transition from our broken Board of Real Property Assessments and Appeals to a new Real Property Tax Appeals Commission, which has been going very well. The budget books are a great source for understanding the reasons and mechanics behind a transition like this.

Another important budget document is the Budget Support Act. This is a nearly 200-page legislative document that provides the legal authority for any action contemplated by the budget, such as the specific rules or criteria for a new tax (Don’t worry, there aren’t any new taxes in this budget!).

A third important category of budget documents is the reports and recommendations of the District Council committees, which brings me back to the opening of this article. My committee report is the best opportunity for me to express my views on the budget in a formal way. In years past, I have used my report the way a Supreme Court justice makes use of a dissenting opinion, to express the reasons why I disagree with the mayor or my colleagues on various proposals. Two years ago, I provided my rationale as to why it was a bad time to increase taxes and fees on our residents and small businesses, despite the fact that the majority of my colleagues did not support me and voted to raise a number of taxes over my objection.

This year, I am pleased to be able to support the budget as a whole. So, my report is more of a statement as to how I think the budget dollars should be directed. While the legislature has the “power of the purse,” the executive branch ultimately gets the authority to spend the money. With this being the case, it is all the more important that the legislature provide clear stipulations as to how the executive agencies spend the funds we appropriate. Last year, for example, we allocated $50,000 to an innovative nonprofit organization that partners with local farmers’ markets to provide incentives to lower income residents to make healthy food choices. The nonprofit partners with farmers’ markets to double the value of WIC dollars, or food stamps, for people who choose to make their purchases at the markets. After we made the allocation, though, the executive decided to use the money for a less-used voucher program, instead, rather than sending the money to the markets. This year, we will be more specific in our legislative language, while also increasing the funding for this important program. When I see a $2.5-billion Medicaid appropriation in our budget every year, it reinforces my desire to shape policy in a way that emphasizes prevention and gets more “bang for our buck.”

I also intend to unveil a new arts funding program in my budget report. While I have been largely pleased with the grant process of the Commission on the Arts and Humanities, I think these grants have been generally too small. This year, I will be making a proposal to dedicate 0.25 percent of our 6 percent sales tax, around $22 million per year, to fund the arts. From within this dedicated tax number, I want to support large art projects as well as small ones. Without city funding, we would not have an amazing Arena Stage facility, as well as one for the Shakespeare Theatre, or a revitalized Ford’s Theatre, among many others. Now that our revenues are growing again, we should recommit to enriching the cultural life of our city and providing this important supplement to the inadequate emphasis on arts education in our public schools.

I hope to have your support on these initiatives.

Jack Evans • April 11, 2013

I was pleased to work with the Mayor Gray as he developed the fiscal year 2014 budget, which will be the District’s 17th consecu- tive balanced budget. I support many of the mayor’s objectives as reflected in this proposal, including restoring funding for the Housing Production Trust Fund. I was pleased to see that many other issues for which I have advocated are also funded in the budget. Let me tell you about a few of the highlights.

First, I have been advocating for quite a while that our libraries be kept open longer. I introduced a bill to mandate that libraries be open seven days a week, and for longer hours. The mayor included in his budget proposal an increase in funding so that all of our public libraries will be open on Sundays. The budget includes $8 million toward new hours and an additional $2 million for new books.

I was also pleased to see included funding to repeal the tax on out-of-state municipal bonds that had been put in the budget a couple of years ago by the prior Council chairman. I introduced and passed a bill to repeal this tax, but it needs an appropriation in order for the repeal to be implemented. The bond tax disproportionately impacts our senior citizens and those near retirement. Rather than encourage these residents to move elsewhere, I am hopeful that we can keep them in the District, where they will continue to contribute to the civic and cultural life of our city.

The budget also includes allocations for projects of importance to Ward 2, such as funds to restore and enhance Stead Park and Mitchell Park, and to keep the DMV located at Georgetown Park. Another item of importance to Ward 2 residents is public safety. I introduced a bill to mandate 4,000 officers as minimum police staffing in 2011. I am glad my proposal is coming to fruition with the mayor’s inclusion of a line item to fully fund 4,000 police officers. Finally, while no longer technically in Ward 2, I have long pushed that the city fulfill its promise to rebuild Shaw Middle School, which serves a dynamic and growing population of District residents, including Ward 2 residents.

The budget also funds a number of citywide initiatives of importance to me. For example, the budget provides for “supercan” trash receptacle replacements throughout the city, which improves the cleanliness of our neighborhoods. This is an issue I have spoken about many times and raised again just a few weeks ago at our legislative meeting. I was also pleased to see funding included for two citywide capital projects I advocated for: $15 million to rebuild the Fort Dupont Ice Rink, in Ward 7; and $18 million for the renovation of the Southeast Tennis and Learning Center, in Ward 8.

One item that continues to need our attention is enhanced funding for the arts. Last year, I identified funds to increase the allocation to the Commission on the Arts & Humanities by more than $6 million. Unfortunately, these were “one time” dollars that were not renewed in the mayor’s 2014 proposal. These cuts are partially offset, however, by a countervailing increase in the commission’s capital budget by more than $2 million in new funding per year. In addition, nonprofits, such as the city’s arts organizations, can apply for up to $100,000 per year, for a total of $300,000, from the “One City Fund” that the mayor has established with a balance of $15 million. I am hopeful that these two funding sources will be used to backfill the other reductions and make sure that our arts community continues to provide important educational and economic development benefits to our city.

This is an important time in the financial life of our city, particularly in light of the upcoming transition of our chief financial officer due to Natwar Gandhi’s recent decision to retire. I believe we are still on very sound financial footing, however, as underscored by our recent bond rating upgrade and the mayor’s responsible budget pro- posal. The District Council will be making its own recommendations regarding the budget in coming weeks. So, please, share your views with me and with my colleagues. ?

Jack Evans • March 28, 2013

As we wait for Mayor Gray to transmit his budget proposal to the District Council, I thought it would be a good week to reflect on some things our government is good at versus some areas that need improvement.

One area our government is pretty good at is ensuring civil rights for all our citizens. Our Human Rights Act is one of the most expansive in the country. In addition, we have the distinction of being one of the first jurisdictions to legalize marriage equality. I remember clearly the introduction of our marriage equality bill, just a few short years ago. I knew it was a historic moment. Due to the volume of legislation we introduce, members often delegate signature authority to a chief of staff or principal legislative staffer. With marriage equality, though, this was the kind of bill I was proud to personally sign.

As with so many areas, however, we can always improve. I watched with interest a recent hearing on our Marriage Officiant Amendment Act. This bill, which I coauthored, provides residents of the District with the ability to select a marriage officiant of their choosing, without having to either attempt to navigate the courthouse, wedding party in tow, or else work through a religious organization. I think it is preferable for couples to be able to select a person of importance in their lives to perform their ceremony, rather than a person they may not know well or at all.

Of course, there is more work to be done on the federal level and around the country. On March 26 and March 27, the Supreme Court will hear arguments relating to marriage equality — specifically, the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as California’s Proposition 8. To show community engagement on these historic issues, a rally in support of freedom and equality will be held by United for Marriage beginning at 8:30 a.m. on March 26, meeting outside the Supreme Court at First and East Capitol Streets, NE. I hope to see you there.

Of course, my office is always available to help my constituents with these and any other D.C. issues.?

Jack Evans • March 13, 2013

Every year, the Mayor, the Chairman of the Council, the Chief Financial Officer and myself, the Chairman of the Finance Committee, meet with the three major Wall Street rating agencies (Fitch, Moody’s, and Standard & Poor’s). These meetings are important because the rating agencies evaluate the fiscal health of cities, counties and states throughout the country. These ratings, in turn, impact the interest rate imposed on our borrowing through public finance bonds. The proceeds of these bonds allow us to make capital improvements, such as work at our schools, libraries, and even roads –backed in part by the federal government as well. The better the rating, the lower the interest rates and the less it costs to borrow the money. Because of the increase in our bond ratings, the District has saved millions in debt service over the years.

This year, the District delegation was pleased to report on the city’s annual audit of FY 2012, which reported a surplus of roughly $417 million. In addition, the delegation discussed the potential impact of the federal sequester cuts and the ongoing efforts to stabilize the United Medical Center hospital in Ward 8. Finally, the rating agencies were interested in the process for selecting a new permanent CFO with the announced retirement of current CFO Natwar Gandhi.

I made a presentation to each of the agencies regarding our eligibility for a ratings upgrade. I reminded the agencies that we’ve done everything they have asked of us – we have put a cap on our borrowing, replenished the fund balance in our “savings accounts,” and produced structurally sound budgets for a number of years. The rating agencies are also realizing that the District’s economy has changed. We used to be able to tax only about 30 percent of the income earned in the District due to our inability to tax commuters. Now, as the number of District residents continues to increase, we are able to tax more like 45 percent of the income earned in the District. This means we have a stronger, more stable economy, and we are working hard to diversify. I always use the example of “BCD” – we are currently rated better than as Baltimore, Cleveland and Detroit, but we should be on the same AAA ratings scale as Boston, Charlotte and Denver.

I am hopeful that this will be the year for an upgrade, but if not, I will continue to advocate for balanced budgets and spending within our means while continuing to bolster our savings accounts. Thanks for your support.

Jack Evans • February 15, 2013

I was disappointed to learn of Dr. Natwar Gandhi’s recent decision to retire as the District’s chief financial officer, effective June 1. Much of our success in maintaining fiscal discipline can be attributed to his leadership. I have said many times that I would not trade the District’s financial position with that of any other city, county or state in the country. The District now has a $1.5-billion cumulative general fund balance, a half-billion-dollar increase from just a few years ago. This is $2 billion above the District’s lowest fund balance level, which was minus $518 million during the Control Board period in 1996. Our audit this year was the District’s 16th consecutive clean audit and our fiscal year 2013 budget was the District’s 16th consecutive balanced budget.

While the mayor and members of the council have at times criticized Gandhi’s conservative revenue forecasts, I strongly believe having a surplus at the end of the year is better than finding ourselves with a deficit and the potential reintroduction of a control board. Particularly during this time of recent instability in our government, it has been critical to have an independent CFO with a demonstrated commitment to maintaining integrity in financial projections regardless of political pressure. I have seen firsthand how difficult it is to bring efficiency into a government bureaucracy, which makes it all the more impressive that our Office of Tax and Revenue can issue income tax refunds in three to five days for electronically filed returns, and just ten days even for paper filings.

Perhaps most important to me is the District’s bond rating. The District must issue bonds to finance important infrastructure improvements, such as schools, libraries and parks. I cannot emphasize enough how adept Gandhi and his team have been at communicating with the credit rating agencies at our annual meeting in New York. These rating agencies determine how expensive it will be for us to borrow money. Meetings such as this help us to secure our Income Tax bond rating of “AAA” by S&P and “Aa1/AA+” by Moody’s and Fitch. Our general obligation bond ratings, which were considered “junk bonds” in the Control Board Period, are now in the A+ and double-A range. The District has been recognized for our new highly-rated Income Tax Secured Revenue Bonds that help to ensure ongoing access to the financial markets with low interest rates. The initial issuance of these bonds gained recognition as one of the Bond Buyer newspaper’s “Deals of the Year” in 2010.

The credit rating agencies now have a very positive view of the District’s financial position and our bond issuances are routinely oversubscribed and pay among the lowest interest rates among major cities. Therefore, I am not just talking about a general sense I have as to Gandhi’s value – Gandhi’s work has led to tangible savings for the District. For example, the use of variable rate bonds has saved us more than $100 million.

Since Gandhi’s resignation is not effective until June 1, I am hopeful the mayor will undertake a thoughtful search and send a well-qualified candidate that I can move swiftly through my committee’s confirmation process.

While Gandhi’s departure will mark a huge loss to the District, the opening presents an opportunity to bring in a new perspective in furthering our financial stability and future growth.

Georgetowner • January 16, 2013

As we begin the new year, these are indeed exciting times for the District.

Personally, I was sworn in for my sixth full term on the Council on Jan. 2 by Judge John Ferren of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, a former corporation counsel to the District of Columbia. My son John held the Bible and I asked my staff to join me on stage – it was a great event.

In just a matter of days, President Barack Obama will be sworn in for his second term. Since I have lived in Washington for nearly 35 years and have served on the Council for almost 22 years, I was reflecting back over my interaction with the various presidents. I first attended a presidential swearing in for President Ronald Regan in January 1981, and still have the pictures to prove it! I remember how cold it was in January 1985, when the inauguration was moved indoors. I witnessed the 1989 swearing in of President George Bush from afar, but actually had a good ticket for the 1993 inauguration of President Bill Clinton, whose campaign I co-chaired in the District. As a member of the City Council, we each got 2 tickets. I attended the 1997 second swearing in of President Clinton, both of the ceremonies for President George Bush, and the ceremony for President Obama’s first inauguration. I always found them to be interesting and exciting. But times have changed, haven’t they? I remember going for a jog on the Mall with Bill Clinton shortly before he was sworn in and then going to McDonalds. This could not happen today with the increased security. We have truly lost something.

During the Clinton years, the local government had a good relationship with the White House. We on the Council were included in a number of events. There was even a person at the White House who was a liaison to the local government. The relationship was not as active during the early Bush years, but it did pick up during his second term. I remember meeting Bush 43 at the Martin Luther King Library on MLK Day. He and his wife, Laura, were very personable. However, as a government, there was less involvement, particularly with respect to issues facing cities. We had hoped this would change with President Obama – I remember him meeting with former Mayor Fenty at Ben’s Chili Bowl four years ago, but I think it is fair to say we are hoping for a more productive relationship between the President and the District in the second term.

There are many opportunities for interaction between our local government and President Obama’s administration. And, remember, President Obama and his family are my constituents, as residents of Ward 2. Happy New Year to all of you and your families, and best wishes for a great 2013!