Speed Cameras Collecting

Apparently revenue from the speed cameras in Chevy Chase, Maryland, on Connecticut Ave. is in decline. Not so in DC........

D.C. speed cameras raking in record amounts of money

By: Liz Essley
Examiner Staff Writer
July 21, 2010

The District is hauling in a record amount from its speed camera tickets, but the police say it's not about the dollars.

So far, with four more months to report in the current fiscal year, the cameras have brought in $25 million. That's more than the total numbers for fiscal 2007 and 2008, and is $4 million ahead of earnings last year at this time.

“We are not doing this for revenue, but to modify dangerous driving behavior,” Police Chief Cathy Lanier told The Washington Examiner via e-mail Tuesday. “Safety is the primary objective. For the past two years, we’ve had the lowest number of traffic fatalities [40 in 2008, 33 in 2009] since we’ve been keeping record.”

Maximizing revenues clearly has been a priority, however, as the city deals with projected budget shortfalls in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Mayor Adrian Fenty submitted a budget that counted on taking in $40.7 million from speed camera tickets in the current year. For 2011, $56.8 million in revenue is projected, for a 40 percent jump.

The District has 10 fixed photo radar cameras and also added 12 mobile speed cameras in July. Currently in the midst of an "educational phase" in which speeders get warnings in the mail, the mobile cameras will start yielding real tickets Aug. 11, according to a police department memo.

John Townsend, spokesman for AAA Mid-Atlantic, said speed cameras are issuing more and more tickets, collecting more revenue, and don't seem to be changing drivers' habits.

"The fact that you're not changing the behavior is puzzling to groups like triple AAA," Townsend said. "It seems that the District has been paying lip service to traffic safety, but people realize it's all about the revenue and they're not changing their behavior."

For a complete list of "Photo Radar Enforcement Zones" in the District, go to http://mpdc.dc.gov/mpdc/cwp/view,a,1240,q,548201,mpdcNav_GID,1552,mpdcNav,|31886|.asp.

The Washington metro area has a total of 274 traffic cameras, according to the camera-tracking database POI Factory






http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/D_C_-speed-cameras-raking-in-record-amounts-of-money-1002069-98875199.html

Good Article On Test Scores Report

The author of GF Brandenburg's blog says it better than I can - their intro:

Nothing But Spin from Rhee and Fenty on Spring 2010 DC-CAS Results

If you read the press release from the Fenty-Rhee Spin HQ, you would think that the (supposedly) wonderful test score rises under Rhee are continuing like gangbusters.

As usual, that’s not really correct.

http://gfbrandenburg.wordpress.com/2010/07/14/nothing-but-spin-from-rhee-and-fenty-on-spring-2010-dc-cas-results/

Deals That Get Better And Better (What Shmucks)

City's options limited under Banneker settlement

By: Freeman Klopott
Examiner Staff Writer
July 8, 2010

The $550,000 settlement agreement between the District and Banneker Ventures prevents the city from reclaiming millions in previous payments and makes it impossible for the District to sue the company if investigators determine the contract was obtained through fraud.

The July 1 settlement reached by D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles and Omar Karim, a longtime friend of Mayor Adrian Fenty, ended a Banneker claim that the city owed the company $2.3 million on the parks and recreation contract. The D.C. Council expects to receive an independent investigator's conclusions on the contract next week.

Late last year, the council canceled the Banneker contract after it determined the Fenty administration had circumvented a law requiring the council to vote on contracts exceeding $1 million.

On Wednesday, D.C. Council members Mary Cheh, Harry Thomas and Phil Mendelson sent a letter to Chief Financial Officer Natwar Gandhi requesting that he not issue payments on the settlement because it's still under investigation by the council.

"It's extraordinarily irregular and questionable to settle this without first settling all of the issues against Banneker and on top of that determining first whether Banneker should be paying us," Cheh said.

The settlement requires Banneker to pay its subcontractors a total of about $285,000, allowing the company to keep $265,000 on top of the $2.5 million it already received in a controversial Christmas Eve payment.

Nickles responded to the council members' threats to cancel the payments, saying "I don't think that would be lawful." He added, "it might lead to a test in the courts and they would have a whole bunch of contracts tied up in litigation."

A. Scott Bolden, who represents Karim, echoed Nickles.

"A deal is a deal," Bolden said. "Any effort to thwart these agreements that make sense and allow projects to move forward is extremely shortsighted and will undoubtedly lead to further litigation."

fklopott@washingtonexaminer.com

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/City_s-options-limited-under-Banneker-settlement-97968084.html



A letter from three City Council members to Mr. Nickles:


COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
THE JOHN A. WILSON BUILDING
1350 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004

July 6, 2010

Peter Nickles, Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 409 Washington, D.C. 20001

Dear Mr. Nickles:

We write out of concern regarding your recent decision to pay a reported $550,000 in settlement of a claim from Banneker Ventures. Your decision to settle at this particular time appears to be poor judgment and motivated by something other than the best interests of the District of Columbia.

As you are aware, the contract for work performed by this vendor was never submitted to, and thus never approved by, the Council. More importantly, a Special Committee of the Council is conducting an investigation into the contracting process, with conclusion of the investigation expected soon. Among the allegations is that Banneker or its subcontractors overcharged the District and failed to supervise properly the work done. The decision to pay this vendor prior to the conclusion of an investigation, prior to all the facts being known, for contracts that were not properly approved, and for work that may have been overcharged, is contrary to your duty to place the interests of the District of Columbia paramount to all else.

The contracting controversy has been marred since the public first became aware of it by a lack of transparency. The Executive, and particularly your office, have failed to provide sufficient detail about the contracting process, and prevented the Special Committee from questioning members of the Administration involved in the matter. District taxpayers are now twice injured by this matter -- the District having apparently paid an exorbitant mark-up when the contract was first issued, and now paying the vendor a large sum of money for no other reason than to bring this matter rapidly to a close. Indeed so far as we know no member of the Council has been given a copy of this settlement agreement, and we hereby insist that both the public and the Council know the terms of the deal you struck. We are particularly distressed that the best interests of the District will be compromised and that our ability to recover money for poor performance and perhaps even fraud will be lost. Accordingly, we hereby request a copy of the settlement agreement.

We have stressed, repeatedly, that the Attorney General is responsible for representing the public interest and upholding the law. For whatever reason, you still fail to grasp this, and your decision to settle this matter at this point is further evidence of that.

Sincerely

Phil Mendelson, Chairperson
Committee on Public Safety & the Judiciary

Mary M. Cheh, Chairperson
Committee on Government Operations & the Environment

Harry Thomas, Jr., Chairperson
Committee on Library, Parks & Recreation

http://www.dcwatch.com/govern/parks100706.htm

Electric Spin

Some interesting information in the press release below. I am also amused how Dominion Virginia Power is positive about what for the company was a setback - lower electric rates are only because the utility was forced to roll back rates - no good intentions for consumers!

Virginia Rate Case Settlement Update

A new, lower fuel rate will go into effect July 1 as a result of a ruling by the Virginia State Corporation Commission. The rate will lower the typical, 1,000 kilowatt-hour monthly residential bill $1.24, or 1.2 percent, to $98.36 from the current level of $99.60.

This is the fourth reduction in the fuel rate in the last 12 months, making the new fuel rate 28 percent lower than the one in effect June 30, 2009.

Dominion Virginia Power requested the lower rate based primarily on the cost of fuel for its power stations going down. The SCC put the new rate into effect on an interim basis, pending a final order later this year.

The SCC has scheduled a public hearing on the fuel rate change for Wednesday, Sept. 10, at the Commission headquarters in Richmond. Written comments on Dominion's proposal should be submitted to the Commission by September 2. The Commission has the authority to put the interim rates into effect permanently or alter them in its final order.

The fuel rate is a pass-through cost with no profit to Dominion.

New, Lower Base Rates Now In Effect

Lower base rates are now in effect for Dominion Virginia Power customers as a result of the comprehensive 2009 rate settlement recently approved by the Virginia State Corporation Commission.

A base rate case refund and interest are also being returned to Virginia customers as part of the settlement. This refund and interest will begin appearing on customer bills as two separate line items, starting on May 3.

Additionally, a fuel credit was recently returned to residential customers under the terms of the settlement. Non-residential customers will have this credit applied to their electricity usage from May 1 through June 30, so the fuel credit will be reflected in a separate line item on their bills covering that period. The exact amount received by each individual customer depends on their historic or current usage.

• View videos on how electric rates are set in Virginia.
• Get details on base rate credits and refunds.
• View a sample bill.

Two new charges for energy efficiency programs go into effect May 1. These charges, called "Rider C1" and "Rider C2" on customer bills, will collectively add about 53 cents per month to the bill of a typical residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt hours a month. These riders are being used to pay for five new energy efficiency programs recently approved by the SCC.

For additional rate comparisons, see Supplemental Charts, below.The total amount being returned to Virginia customers under the settlement in the form of credits and lower rates is $726 million or about $153 for a residential customer who uses 1,000 kilowatt-hours a month. In addition, this typical residential customer will also receive an estimated $42 in refunds, plus interest.

On April 21, the company lowered its base rates to pre-Sept. 1, 2009 levels as directed by the SCC. The SCC approved the new lower base rates and the fuel and base rate credits on March 11 as part of the comprehensive rate case settlement agreed to by the parties in the case, which included the SCC staff, consumer representatives, major business customers and others.

Company seeks increase for power stations under construction

On June 25, Dominion Virginia Power filed an update with the SCC to the portion of electric rates (called riders) that cover its two generating stations under construction: Virginia City Hybrid Energy Center in Wise County and Bear Garden in Buckingham County.

As part of the update, the company requested an increase of $1.39 to the monthly bill of a typical 1,000 kilowatt-hour residential customer. If approved, the increase would take effect April 1, 2011.

The SCC approved construction of the Virginia City power station in 2008 and the Bear Garden facility in 2009. The company is recovering financing costs as the stations are being built. The SCC adjusts these rates annually.

http://www.dom.com/dominion-virginia-power/customer-service/rates-and-tariffs/virginia-rate-case-settlement-update.jsp

Skinner/Fenty Scam Gets Better

Makes me wonder....

D.C. licensed Fenty friend who failed engineering exam 7 times

By: Bill Myers
Examiner Staff Writer
July 7, 2010

A D.C. board issued an engineering license to a co-founder of a company with ties to Mayor Adrian Fenty even though the man has never passed the professional exam, The Washington Examiner has learned.

Abdullahi Barrow has emerged as a key figure in the ongoing investigationinto millions of dollars' worth of parks contracts awarded to companies owned by the mayor's friends and fraternity brothers. One of them, Sinclair Skinner, has said publicly that he relied on Barrow's expertise to win public parks contracts for Liberty Engineering and Design, a company founded by Skinner and Barrow.

But Barrow failed his engineer's exam seven times since 2002, sources said and documents obtained by ner show. In 2008, the Fenty-appointed Board of Professional Engineers unanimously granted Barrow the professional license because of his "eminence" in the field, board spokesman Clive Cooks said.

There are three ways to obtain a professional engineer's license in the District: passing the exam, having already obtained a license in another state, or for eminence. The board rarely issues eminence licenses, Cooks said. Since 2005, only four have been given out -- including Barrow's, Cooks said.

Barrow's lawyer, A. Scott Bolden, said any suggestion that Barrow wasn't qualified as an engineer was "nonsense."

"He's got a master's degree, he's got several years of experience in D.C. government, he's got substantial experience in the public and the private sector over several years, including being a former chief building inspector for the District government," Bolden said. "Sounds like he's qualified to me regardless of how many engineering exams he's taken."

Fenty spokeswoman Mafara Hobson didn't respond to requests for comment.

Barrow was deposed last month. Sources familiar with his testimony said that Barrow, like Skinner, had trouble recalling basic details about his company, including its first client and the last name of a third man, "Chris," who initially started the business with Skinner and Barrow.

Barrow said, however, that yet another company co-founded by him and his wife was paid by Liberty Engineering, the sources said. The company, Providence Construction, has also been given a contract to build a fence for the city's real estate agency, sources said.

The council canceled the parks contracts shortly after learning about them and ordered an investigation. The Washington Post first reported last week that Fenty's attorney general, Peter Nickles, agreed to pay $550,000 to Banneker Ventures to settle a lawsuit over the cancellations.

Council members Phil Mendelson, D-at large, Harry Thomas, D-Ward 5, and Mary Cheh, D-Ward 3, wrote Nickles a letter Tuesday condemning the settlement.

Examiner staff writer Freeman Klopott contributed to this report.

bmyers@washingtonexaminer.com

fklopott@washingtonexaminer.com

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/D_C_-licensed-Fenty-friend-who-failed-engineering-exam-7-times-97895459.html

Students to be newest judges of DCPS teachers

By: Leah Fabel
Examiner Staff Writer
June 18, 2010

After years of having their performance graded by teachers, D.C. public school students will have the chance to return the favor beginning next school year.

Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee said Thursday morning that a movement to gather student input into how well teachers succeeded in the classroom grew from the concerns of her "high school cabinet" -- a group of students she meets with on a regular basis. She shared the news at a breakfast for businesswomen at Georgetown's Sequoia restaurant.

Students worried that teachers would "put on a good dog and pony show" when official evaluators entered the classroom, Rhee said, despite less stellar day-to-day instruction.

Rhee's student Cabinet spent part of the 2009-10 school year devising questions -- ensuring they're concise enough and fair, she said. The surveys will be piloted next year, but will not -- for now -- be a part of the schools' new teacher evaluations. Those evaluations, called IMPACT, will likely guide decisions about the district's pay-for-performance system outlined in the new teacher contract.

Washington Teachers' Union President George Parker did not return a call requesting comment.

Rhee spokeswoman Jennifer Calloway said the surveys will be important "because we value student perspectives on the quality of instruction in their classroom, and there is an emerging body of research that suggests it may correlate with actual outcomes."

Survey details, however, have yet to be finalized, Calloway said.

Boston Public Schools voted to begin using student surveys next school year to be shared with teachers and principals. A Rhode Island group called Young Voices is advocating for a similar program there.

"I think it's a terrific idea, as long as we think about this particular metric as one of many," said Barnett Berry, president of the Center for Teaching Quality. "No one measure is able to judge a teacher's efficacy -- certainly not a single test score. Using multiple measures is absolutely paramount."

Emily Cohen, a policy director for the National Council on Teacher Quality, met with students in Boston as they fought for the use of student evaluations.

"They wanted to have a way to let their teachers know what was working," Cohen said. "They have the most to gain from a good teacher -- and the most to lose from a bad one."

lfabel@washingtonexaminer.com

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Students-to-be-newest-judges-of-DCPS-teachers-96611439.html

Getting And Getting - Or Fenty/Skinner - The Scam That Keeps Taking

Fenty's tax payer provided pit bull, Mr. Nickles is often more than happy to litigate. Not here though - is Scott Bolden that good of a lawyer? Bolden's comments near the end make me nauseous. Such a f@*&ing liar!

D.C. will pay Fenty friend's company to settle construction suit

By Nikita Stewart
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 2, 2010; 11:06 PM

The District has agreed to pay $550,000 to settle a $2.3 million claim by Banneker Ventures, the firm whose city contract to oversee the construction of renovated and new parks and recreation centers was terminated last year in the wake of an ongoing D.C. Council probe.

Banneker, owned by a friend and fraternity brother of Mayor Adrian M. Fenty's, argued that it owned the drawings and designs produced by the architects and engineers that the firm hired as subcontractors for the projects.

Although Fenty (D) has repeatedly said the recreation centers and ballfields are on track to be built, there have been delays because Banneker served its subcontractors with "cease and desist" letters in February to prevent them from working with the city agency now managing the projects.

"They had threatened to sue the architects, engineers, because they said their work was intellectual property of Banneker," Attorney General Peter Nickles said in an interview Friday. "There were lots of issues, but now we have a settlement."

The agreement took effect Thursday, when it was signed by Nickles and Adrianne Todman, interim executive director of the D.C. Housing Authority. It comes two weeks before a special council committee expects a briefing from lawyer Robert P. Trout, who is heading the council's independent investigation on a pro bono basis. Trout is reviewing how the contract was handled.

D.C. Council member Harry Thomas Jr. (D-Ward 5), chairman of the Committee on Libraries, Parks and Recreation, said Trout will present an update of the probe but that a final report is not ready. The investigation has been slowed by witnesses who remain reluctant despite subpoenas, he said.

The contracts controversy has been a campaign issue for Fenty, who is in a competitive contest against chief rival D.C. Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D) in the Sept. 14 Democratic primary.

Thomas said he is aware that releasing a final report closer to the election could be perceived as politically motivated, but he added that Trout and his staff are trying to be thorough. "What we're trying to do is have true findings as opposed to thinking this is a political witch hunt. We want to do this right," Thomas said.

Omar Karim, owner of Banneker, and Regan Associates, the Virginia-based firm that served as Banneker's consultant, have been heavy contributors to Fenty's campaign. One of Banneker's subcontractors was Liberty Engineering and Design, a firm owned by Sinclair Skinner, another Fenty friend and fraternity brother.

The firm earned about $900,000 on its subcontract, according to testimony Skinner gave before the committee after a Superior Court judge threatened him with a costly fine for failing to appear. Skinner, who is not a licensed engineer, farmed out much of the work to other firms.

He remains a visible volunteer on Fenty's campaign.

Lawyer A. Scott Bolden, who represents Karim and Skinner, called the situation "a legal mess created by others."

"Unfortunately, the unnecessary and unreasonable scrutiny of this D.C. contract is ongoing with the D.C. Council at great expense to my clients and the residents of the District of Columbia, with the real victims being D.C. residents, Banneker and its many subcontractors who worked extremely hard to simply renovate and rebuild several recreation and community centers in the most challenged part of the city," Bolden said in an e-mail Friday.

The council began its investigation in October after learning that the mayor's administration had funneled millions of dollars through the D.C. Housing Authority for the projects. The transfer circumvented a city law requiring the council to vote on contracts exceeding $1 million.

Banneker's initial contract was $4.2 million and allowed the firm to collect a 9 percent markup on some subcontractors it hired for nearly $100 million.

In December, the housing authority and the Fenty administration were criticized for giving Banneker $2.5 million on Christmas Eve for work done by the firm and 12 subcontractors from September through November.

This week's $550,000 settlement is supposed to cover unresolved payments.

Under the agreement, Banneker will get nearly $265,000 within 10 days. Banneker will receive the remaining $285,000 when it can show that it has paid money owed to nine subcontractors, including $11,863 to Liberty.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/02/AR2010070204030.html