Natural Healing—Just what the Doctor Ordered
• March 7, 2012

Natural medicine is nothing new to Dr. Snejana Sharkar. Growing up, her mother would cure her colds with ingredients in their kitchen. “Teaspoons of herbal honey, black pepper and red wine several times a day,” said Sharkar. “For coughs and congestion, she would make a warm compress for my chest with crushed poppy seeds.”

After receiving several Masters Degrees and Board Certifications, Sharkar is now giving her patients the same care her mother gave to her.

“I believe in conventional medicine, too, don’t get me wrong,” she said. “But it’s more beneficial to treat botanically first, using hydrotherapy and even healing with massages and acupuncture.”

Dr. Sharkar spent seven years at a family practice in Washington, D.C. as an ANCC Board Certified Nurse Practitioner and then 12 years specializing in adult cardiology before opening her own practice in Georgetown in February 2011. She received her Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine (ND) from the University of Science, Art and Technology, Montserrat, British West Indies and London, United Kingdom, is Board Certified in Integrative Medicine and is a member of the American Association of Integrative Medicine. She is the only provider in the Washington, D.C. area who holds a certification with the Wilson’s Temperature Syndrome (WTS) Restorative Medicine.

Her new private practice, Indigo Integrative Health Clinic, is focused on allowing the body to heal itself by discovering and treating or removing the cause of pain. IIHC is located at 1010 Wisconsin Avenue and is open Monday – Wednesday. Her patients receive her time and devotion at each appointment. She tells them to leave 60-90 minutes in their schedules for their initial visits in order to get the most out of what the clinic has to offer.

Contact Indigo Integrative Health Clinic at 202-298-9131 or go online to schedule an appointment at www.IndigoHealthClinic.com.

JACK EVANS REPORTMarch 7, 2012
•

This week, I chaired a meeting of the Committee on Finance and Revenue to consider a bill to require mobile vendors, including food trucks, to pay sales taxes. The bill amends a section of the District?s tax law that currently exempts sidewalk and mobile street vendors from sales tax requirements.

Currently, sidewalk and mobile street vendors, including food trucks, pay a quarterly fee of $375 to the District in lieu of having to pay sales taxes the way other food service businesses must. Members of the public and other stakeholders have pointed out that this is not a fair system, and the evolution of the mobile vendor market requires a modernization of our tax laws. A writer for the Washington Blade recently called the current quarterly fee ?a token alternative annual payment initiated several decades ago? and advocated for ?sales tax parity? as found in the bill I am sponsoring.

Legitimate concerns have been raised by the food truck industry about the need for comprehensive regulatory reform that more accurately takes into account their true corporate structure and business activities. At my hearing last year, for example, the executive director of the D.C. Food Truck Association testified that, like storefront restaurants, mobile vendors should be licensed and taxed as businesses rather than as sole proprietors. However, requiring individual street vendors to have a vending license, she says, makes about as much sense as requiring an individual waitress in a restaurant to have a business license. I tend to concur.
Regardless of the merits of that argument, though, the subject matter of corporate form is not within the purview of my committee, but rather is being addressed by regulations from the District?s Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA). Comments on the proposed rules were due March 1 and are posted at [dcra.dc.gov](http://dcra.dc.gov).

The bill I moved this week has been subject to debate and public comment since at least March of 2011 and would not propose to implement the tax until October 1, giving plenty of notice to the industry while also allowing a reasonable amount of time for the regulations to become effective prior to implementation of the sales tax. As noted by the writer quoted above, however, ?there is scant evidence of public support for continuing to exempt the[se] businesses from the standard sales tax levy? or allowing the sales tax issue to remain unresolved while the regulatory process is completed.

Also this week, I chaired a hearing on my proposed bill to repeal the out-of-state municipal bond tax. I have heard from many constituents about the hardship and unfairness of changing a law that impacts so many seniors after they have already relied on the tax break in good faith when making their retirement plans. While the hearing has already taken place, the record will remain open until March 9. If you have time to send a letter to my staff [kstogner@dccouncil.us](mailto:kstogner@dccouncil.us) in support of the bill by next Friday, we will include it in our official record to help demonstrate the support we need to convince the Mayor and the couple of swing votes on the Council we need to repeal this tax.

Protecting Our Historic Homes
•

At the latest meeting of the Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2E, officials approved revised designs by the Tudor Place Foundation for new small buildings on the historic home’s grounds along 31st and Q Streets. Such approval was a triumph of balance between neighbors and a historic home. While some did not like the proposed garage designs taking up their line of sight on 32nd Street, the argument did not devolve into a “not-in-my-back-yard” discussion. Tudor Place modified its initial designs after critiques by neighbors and government bodies, and the result was a better design overall.

We must find ways to maintain the historic homes within our neighborhood without going NIMBY on them. They are fragile and expensive to get. Likewise, owners of these properties should always engage the residents in their mission and future. Two historic Georgetown homes – Evermay and Halcyon House – are now under the umbrella of the same non-profit, S&R Foundation, which appears more than willing and able to preserve and protect them. Families, it seems, cannot hang on to such large properties.

As Georgetowners and bearers of the light of history, we must work with the persons or groups that own our historical places. We cannot make it all about us. At the same time, they may own it, but it is not theirs alone.

On Civility and Public Discourse
•

Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University Law Center student, found herself the target of radio host Rush Limbaugh on March 1 after recommending that employers cover the costs of contraception in their health care programs at a meeting of the House Democratic Steering Committee. For her remarks, Limbaugh called Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute.”

“So, Miss Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here’s the deal,” Limbaugh continued. “If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.”

“This language is an attack on all women,” Fluke responded. “The millions of American women who have and will continue to speak out in support of women’s health care and access to contraception prove that we will not be silenced.”

After a major outcry against the radio commentator – including a phone call to Fluke from President Barack Obama on March 2 – Limbaugh apologized March 3. “In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation,” he said. “I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke… In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone’s bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a presidential level. My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”

Below is a letter by John J. DeGioia, president of Georgetown University, commenting on the fracas.

There is a legitimate question of public policy before our nation today. In the effort to address the problem of the nearly 50 million Americans who lack health insurance, our lawmakers enacted legislation that seeks to increase access to health care. In recent weeks, a question regarding the breadth of services that will be covered has focused significant public attention on the issue of contraceptive coverage. Many, including the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, have offered important perspectives on this issue.

In recent days, a law student of Georgetown, Sandra Fluke, offered her testimony regarding the proposed regulations by the Department of Health and Human Services before a group of members of Congress. She was respectful, sincere, and spoke with conviction. She provided a model of civil discourse. This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people. One need not agree with her substantive position to support her right to respectful free expression. And yet, some of those who disagreed with her position – including Rush Limbaugh and commentators throughout the blogosphere and in various other media channels – responded with behavior that can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.

In our vibrant and diverse society, there always are important differences that need to be debated, with strong and legitimate beliefs held on all sides of challenging issues. The greatest contribution of the American project is the recognition that together, we can rely on civil discourse to engage the tensions that characterize these difficult issues, and work towards resolutions that balance deeply held and different perspectives. We have learned through painful experience that we must respect one another and we acknowledge that the best way to confront our differences is through constructive public debate. At times, the exercise of one person’s freedom may conflict with another’s. As Americans, we accept that the only answer to our differences is further engagement.

In an earlier time, St. Augustine captured the sense of what is required in civil discourse: “Let us, on both sides, lay aside all arrogance. Let us not, on either side, claim that we have already discovered the truth. Let us seek it together as something which is known to neither of us. For then only may we seek it, lovingly and tranquilly, if there be no bold presumption that it is already discovered and possessed.”

If we, instead, allow coarseness, anger – even hatred – to stand for civil discourse in America, we violate the sacred trust that has been handed down through the generations beginning with our Founders. The values that hold us together as a people require nothing less than eternal vigilance. This is our moment to stand for the values of civility in our engagement with one another.

‘I’m Sorry’ Don’t Right the Wrong
•

I could have sworn I heard Brenda Lee making a come back, singing “I’m sorry, so sorry, please accept my apologies.”

Being sorry and apologizing has become something of a fad these days — only recently a Montana judge apologized for sending President Barack Obama an e-mail that the judge himself said was racist. He apologized and said he was sorry.

Gregg Williams, the former Washington Redskins and New Orleans Saints defensive coordinator, apologized for instituting a bounty system for both teams, handing out cash rewards to players who executed exceptionally tough hits on opposing offensive players, giving points for knockouts and stretcher-inducing hits. He said, among other things, that he was, of course, sorry.

And now, to paraphrase the late President Richard Nixon, it’s conservative talk show Rush Limbaugh’s turn in the shooting barrel. Limbaugh, whose reputation for nuance when it comes to what he says on his talk show, is nil, is up to — we believe — his third apology, 21st lost advertiser and two drops from radio stations. Quite a little fire storm in that booth.

So what did the vitriolic, bombastic Limbaugh do this time? Quite a lot. He attacked a Georgetown University law student named Sandra Fluke, who wanted to testify on why her college’s health plan should cover contraception pills.

Here are the most offensive—we think—parts of Limbaugh’s take: “What does it say about the college coed Sandra Fluke who goes before a congressional Committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? Makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraceptives. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex.”

Later, he added that he wanted her to post videos of her sexual activities.

At first, Limbaugh said he was just trying to be humorous because he is, after all, about satire. Limbaugh’s lion-like Wednesday sermon was followed Saturday by a squeaky, mouse-like statement on his website. “My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir,” that statement reads. “I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”

Those two words were inappropriate and uncalled for,” Limbaugh said “They distracted from the point I was actually trying to make, and again I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for using those two words.”

Somehow, this doesn’t quite meet the standard for a sincere apologies, or any notion of just what a stink he made by what he said. Anybody with a daughter, a mother, a wife or just a general respect for women should be ready to burn Limbaugh’s house down. Just being satirical.

It wasn’t just the two words — offensive, vile and personal as they may be in this case.

It was the casual way they were strutted out as if it’s just the most natural thing to say about anybody.

Given Limbaugh’s status as a powerful and influential conservative, Republicans and conservatives respondedly weakly. Rick Santorum said Limbaugh’s comments were “absurd.” Mitt Romney said, “I would have said something different” or some such words, leading to wonder what that might have been. House Speaker John Boehner called his statements “inappropriate.” No, sir — wearing an orange tie to an Irish bar on St. Patrick’s day is inappropriate (and dangerous). Calling a smart, intelligent law student a slut and a prostitute — calling any woman that — is, well . . . let Don Imus say it: “Rush Limbaugh is an insincere pig, vile and gutless.”

It takes a little doing to be insulted by Don Imus, but there you are.

Or let’s hear it from Senator John McCain, who called Limbaughs’ comments “totally unacceptable” and “should be condemned by everyone. “

So there. As for writing about this matter, I hope no one was offended or upset. If so, well, you know the drill:
I’m sorry. So sorry. Please accept my apology. Thank you, Brenda Lee.

The Thrills of the Oscars
• March 5, 2012

Watching the 2012 Oscar Awards made you feel:

1) Thrilled

2) Bored

3) Old

4) Nostalgic

5) Made you miss Billy Bush

6) Didn’t watch it

If you picked 6), I can’t say I blame you.

As for me:

1) Thrilled (sometimes)

2) Bored (often)

3) Old (uncomfortably so)

4) Nostalgic (comfortably so)

5) Made you miss Billy Bush (surprisingly so)

Some highlights of the evening include Angelina Jolie’s gam thigh-high striking pose of grand dame movie star, Meryl Streep, who broke her almost three-decade losing streak and made her husband cry, and George Glooney, who didn’t win, but kissed Billy Crystal on the lips. We also got to see a portion of the sink scene from “Bridesmaids,” thank you so much. And, rumor has it that one flew out of the cuckoo’s nest, otherwise known as the dress that Jennifer Lopez almost wore.

The biggest thrill was not Jennifer Lopez—missed that because Robin Roberts was busy talking to Prince Albert of Monaco on ABC’s red carpet show. It happened right in the middle of things when Cirque du Soleil’s “Iris” performers put on a startling, gorgeous homage to movies, with flying Cary Grants and heart-stopping flights without nets, like a convention of lithe stuntmen and women.

Let’s not forget Christopher Plummer’s acceptance speech. After being reminded once too often that he was the oldest Oscar winner ever, at age 82, first by a gabby English red carpet reporter, then by Billy Crystal, he took the Oscar and looked at it sweetly and asked, “I’m only two years older than you, where have you been all my life?”

Thrilling, too, was the odd fact that every time they ran a clip of the charming dancing fools from “The Artist,” (the semi-French, semi-silent film which won the Best Picture Award as predicted), it energized the place in ways that no amount of banter by presenters trying and failing to be funny—that was for you, Emma Stone, and you Robert Downey Jr., or even the ladies from “Bridesmaids”, although God knows they tried manfully or womanfully—could match.

Humorous was the skit number featuring a 1930s depression audience watching a test screening of “The Wizard of Oz” and their reactions. Thank God that wasn’t real.

Crystal—after many a winter’s absence—returned to his old hosting role with aplomb—the clips, being kissed by Clooney’s “The Descendant’s” character, running into Justin Bieber, the odd on target quip. And yet, it wasn’t the same. It was predictable and a little wan, like that little bad boy’s smile after a joke that didn’t quite land as sharply as it should have.

For the most part, however, I was bored by the predictability of the big awards—maybe a long awards season seems to settle the choosing of the winners to the point of an absence of any sort of surprises. Ergo, if you’d been paying attention you knew the French guy was going to beat Clooney for best actor, and that “The Artist” was going to win Best Picture, and best director, and best dog, if there had been a category.

The only semi-surprise was Streep’s win for best actress as Margaret Thatcher in “The Iron Lady”, a film that did not match either “Harry Potter” or the latest “Transformers” receipts. A popular semi-favorite in that category, Viola Davis of “The Help” did not win, but Octavia Spencer from the same movie did win best supporting actress. She immediately turned into emotional, wordless, joyful mush, providing a refreshing authentic moment.

The two films that could be considered the big winners were “The Artist” which was a French film with few, if any, words, some barks and the sound of tap dancing and phones, that paid kinetic, original tribute to the golden age of Hollywood as it was beginning to learn to speak, and “Hugo”, Martin Scorcese’s homage to Paris and the founder of narrative film. Our political right wing—ever suspicious of all things French—will find further proof that something’s rotten in Hollywood by that pervasive French and Parisian flavor to the proceedings. On the other hand, the French to a man and dog said, “I love this country.” Go figure.

“The Artist” and “Hugo” were about old Hollywood. They are films about the movies when they were both movies and cinema, oozing nostalgia. So for that matter, an alarmingly thin Jolie, who in a splendid gown, her hair down like a gorgeous witch, struck a pose that made her seem like she was auditioning for some far-in-the-future remake of “Sunset Boulevard.”

All of which made me feel both pleasantly nostalgic—the older you get, the more there is to remember—and old—the older you get, the more there is to remember.

When Plummer mentioned his daughter Amanda, I remembered Tammy Grimes, whom I had an occasion to interview twice over the years, was her mother, and when the French producer of “The Artist” paid tribute to the late director Claude Berri as his inspiration, I remembered seeing both “Jeanne de Florette” and “Manon of the Springs,” two remarkable films Berri directed in the 1990s, at the Key Theater, which of course is no longer there.

Washington D.C. To Host High Speed Rail Summit
•

The Federal Highway Act of 1956 changed the lives of Americans. Thousands of jobs were created, cars were purchased and suburbs emerged. Our economy thrived and revitalized our nation. Trains were no longer needed as automobiles were affordable and all the rage.

56 years later, it is 2012. Cars are not as affordable. Gas prices are through the roof. Our carbon footprints are larger than life. And our economy, well, we all know how that is.

To help with job creation and get America moving again (and fast), many are in support of bringing the High Speed Rail to the United States. The HSR will connect major cities together with a 17,000 mile national high speed rail system with an estimated completion date by 2030.

The trains are revolutionizing the world as they speed across countries at 220 miles per hour. They currently operate in more than 20 countries worldwide including the UK, France, Spain, China and Germany. In Japan, 9 billion passengers have been riding the trains for over 45 years without a single fatality. Ten more countries are under construction including Saudi Arabia and Italy. Turkey, Morocco, Russia, Poland, Brazil and Argentina are among the 14 countries currently under development.

The High Speed Rail Summit, an independent, nonprofit trade association focused on advancing the speed rail in the country, will be meeting in Washington, D.C. on February 28- March 1 where supporters and opponents of bringing the trains to our nation can voice their opinions. Numerous highlighted speakers who will be in attendance include U.S. Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Congressman John Mica, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and U.S. Congressman Jim Oberstar. They’ll inform the public and continue to gain popularity and support to begin building the trains that could reshape our country’s transportation system and kick our economy back in to full gear.

The speakers will discuss the many challenges with launching a major new infrastructure project as large as this, such as the high cost to begin the project (just $98 billion in California alone), but will also stress the importance of bringing the high speed rail to the United States. The High Speed Rail Summit said the project will not only revive our economy and add millions of new jobs, but it will reduce our dependence on oil, reduce congestion and provide safe and affordable transportation. These trains have the ability to take 18.6 million cars off the road, said Peter Calthorpe for the New York Times. “This type of development means less air pollution, fewer respiratory diseases, less water consumption, efficient local infrastructure and lower costs to local governments,” he said.

With the pros and cons piling up across the country, it might be difficult to decide to stand for or against the High Speed Rail. Join others this Tuesday- Thursday at Alion Conference Center, 1100 New Jersey Ave S.E., directly across the street from Navy Yard metro station, for speeches, networking events and programs to establish an opinion on the project that could quite possibly change the way Americans travel. Again.

Register here:

YouTube Video: High Speed Trains Around The World

Weekend Roundup March 1, 2012
•

Young Innovators Seminar and Exhibition

MARCH 2ND, 2012 AT 10:00 AM | EVENT
WEBSITE

Learn more about how to support and promote young innovators at this event with speakers including White House Director for Youth Engagement, Ronnie Cho, and Sweden’s Minister for Enterprise, Ms. Annie Loof, who are helping to get the youth’s ideas to market

Address

House of Sweden

2900 K Street NW

Tilar Mazzeo & Stacy Schiff

MARCH 2ND, 2012 AT 07:30 PM | $15 | TEL: (202) 675- 0342 | EVENT WEBSITE

Mazzeo is a New York Time best-selling author of books on wine, travel, French culture, and the history of luxury, including The Secret of Channel No. 5: The Intimate History of the World’s Most Famous Perfume. Schiff is the author of Vera, winner of the Pulitzer Prize, and most recently, Cleopatra: A Life, named one of The New York Times’ 10 Best Books of 2010. Reception and boook signing to follow.

Address

Folger Shakespeare Library

201 East Capitol Street SE

Washington, DC 20003

Family Day 2012: Up, Up, and Away!

MARCH 3RD, 2012 AT 10:00 AM | TEL: (202) 639- 1700 | EVENT WEBSITE

Inspired by themes of space and travel as seen in Are We There Yet? featuring special hands-on art workshops, performances and more

Address

500 17th Street NW

Washington, D.C. 20006

The Art and Words of John Paton Davies, Jr.

MARCH 3RD, 2012 AT 12:00 PM | TEL: (301) 581- 5100 | EVENT WEBSITE

Monoprints by the celebrated diploment turned artist, John Paton Davies, Jr. will be on display

Address

Strathmore

10701 Rockville Pike, North Bethesda, MD

Preparing for the Ball: Dancing

MARCH 6TH, 2012 AT 07:00 PM | 10-12 | TEL: 202-337-2288 | EVENT WEBSITE

Second in a series of four 19th-century skills & etiquette workshops, with the “American Ladies,” Pat Sowers and Jackie Geschickter. Become immersed in Jane Austen’s world at Dumbarton House’s annual Spring Ball on March 24. To prepare for the festivities, attend one or all four classes on period games and dances. Series includes: Feb. 28, Gaming; March 6, Dancing; March 13, Gaming; and March 20, Dancing. Classes are held in the Belle Vue Room. Each class $12; Members $10.

Address
Dumbarton House

2715 Q Street, NW,

Washington, DC, 20007

Dalton Pratt hosts a trunk show for Kara Ackerman Jewelry

MARCH 8TH, 2012 AT 06:00 PM | $45.00-$2000.00 | DALTONPRATTDC@GMAIL.COM | TEL: 202-333-3256 | EVENT WEBSITE

Dalton Pratt invites you to a trunk show featuring Kara Ackerman fine and fashion jewelry. Thursday, March 8th 6:00 to 8:00 pm cocktails, Friday March 9th and Saturday March 9th 10:00 am to 5:30 pm.

Address

1742 Wisconsin Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20007

Checking Over the Helen Hayes Nominations
•

As usual, as always, the Helen Hayes Awards nomination announcements give great joy to those individual artists who have been nominated and generate a lot of grousing, head scratching and more than a little controversy.

The folks at the Helen Hayes Awards, which tally up the work of a hierarchy of judges to arrive at their nominations, have been at it for 28 years now, and, as with all awards processes, you’re not going to make everybody happy. This is true for the HHs, as well as the Oscars, Grammys, Tonys and so on. But the Helen Hayes Awards have always had a kind of ebb and flow throughout their history, almost a celebratory duty to reveal the depth and breadth, the true size and variety of the talented groups and individual artists that comprise the Washington theater community.

Theaters come and go, and those that stay are eventually rewarded. It took Joy Zinoman, founder of the Studio Theater, a number of years to receive an outstanding director, while her successor David Muse is up for two this year (and deservedly so) for “The Habit of Art” and “Venus in Fur.” Small theaters often struggle for years to get recognized, but look what’s happened in recent times to Toby Orenstein at Toby’s Dinner Theater and Adventure Theater, the surging children’s theater in Glen Echo that is starting to be recognized.

Others have instant success: take note of Signature Theater’s instant blowout with “Sweeney Todd,” which debuted under Eric Schaeffer and seemingly never stopped. And Synetic Theater, the Georgian (as in Russia) troupe that specializes in mounting silent Shakespearean works and classical theater by way of movement, choreography and silence, is popular with judges and critics every year, often walking away with outstanding ensemble, direction, choreography and design awards.

But 15 nominations for Synetic’s version of “King Lear”? Really?

The nominations, including several for acting, raise questions about the nominations that are showered on Synetic. The problem with the group — headed by the husband and wife team of Pata and Irina Tsikurshvilli — is a kind of contradiction. I think it’s a remarkable group, and there is no argument with the fact that the troupe is a Washington treasure. Its style is unique, original and often downright astonishing. There’s no other company doing work like Synetic except perhaps major dance companies. Synetic is in a category all its own for which there is no real competition. It seems to me at least that matching actors, for instance, who don’t have to memorize lines or speeches, or deal with the niceties dealt with by actors in even the most cutting edge new plays seems unfair to both. Just saying.

Traditionally, the awards constitute a combination of old and new, and honor both resident and non-resident plays. But those distinctions sometimes blur. For instance, the Kennedy Center, which imports much of its theatrical offerings, including highly anticipated national tours of Broadway shows, has also been a successful producer under its president Michael Kaiser. Last year’s ground-up production of Stephen Sondheim’s “Follies,” which starred Bernadette Peters and was directed by Schaeffer, could be expected to get a few nods. It did, competing with the award for “Best Musical” with “Liberty Smith,” a popular family take on the American Revolution, at Ford’s “Pop,” a musical about Andy Warhol at Studio, “Hairspray” at Signature and “Side by Side with Sondheim” at Signature.

Schaeffer, Peters and other artists did not make the list, although Jan Maxwell did.

“Best Resident” play nominations were given to Folger’s mounting of “Cyrano!,” Synetic’s “King Lear”, Arena’s “Ruined,” the haunting, stark “A Bright New Boise” at the Woolly Mammoth and “Venus in Fur” at Studio.

My favorites for actors and actresses: Ted van Griethuysen playing W.H. Auden in “The Habit of Art” at Studio Theater, and the remarkable Erica Sullivan for her quick-silver turn in “Venus in Fur.” I’d also give the nod for best performer in a musical to the immensely appealing and energetic Geoff Packard, who made “Liberty Smith” as good as it could possibly be. And I’ll still take “Follies” as best among the musicals, and “A Bright New Boise” in a tie with “Venus in Fur.” (They often have ties at these things).

Winners will be announced in the annual gala at the Warner Theatre April 23. For a complete list of nominees, go to www.TheatreWashington.org.

End Glover Park’s Liquor Moratorium
•

After a long standoff between citizens, business owners and community organizations, the Glover Park ANC has voted to raise the cap of its 16-year-old moratorium to bring in more bars and restaurants—by two.

Two more liquor licenses for beer, wine and spirits have been brought into the commercial strip that has been struggling to attract commerce for years. Empty storefronts and underwhelming establishments run up and down the blocks of Glover Park, with retail scarce and new businesses almost nonexistent—unless you can’t the new Chipotle, which sticks out like a very fancy weed.

The neighborhood has long struggled with revitalization efforts, caught between lifting the moratorium altogether to bring in more bars and restaurants, and its residents resisting for fear of their neighborhood turning into a raucous bar crawl avenue and party scene every weekend. As Washington City Paper pointed out, “It’s a familiar debate: Places like H Street, Barracks Row, and U Street have all flirted with the idea of turning off the taps.”

This is the first increase in liquor licenses for the neighborhood since 2008, when three new licenses were released and all but devoured by the already-existing Surfside, Breadsoda and Rocklands.

Still, the Glover Park Citizens Association (GPCA) is fighting to lift the moratorium entirely. “By not recommending to end the [liquor license] moratorium completely the last time this debate happened, the ANC missed a chance to promote growth and diversity in our neighborhood eateries… Liquor licenses are necessary for Glover Park restaurants to compete with restaurants in other nearby areas,” GPAC said in a joint statement on their petition website, [GPMoratorium.com](http://www.gpmoratorium.com/#!).

The next GPCA meeting to discuss the moratorium is Tuesday, March 6, at 7pm at Stoddert Elementary on Calvert St. For more information visit [GPAC](http://www.gpcadc.org/) online.