>> MAYOR: GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY.
I WANT TO COME AND PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON OUR REQUEST TO THE
COUNCIL FOR SEVERAL AMENDMENTS TO MY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST.
SO WITH THIS BUDGET I THINK YOU KNOW I'M ADVANCING MY COMMITMENT
TO DEVELOP INCLUSIVE PROSPERITY ACROSS OUR CITY, INVESTING IN
WORKERS AND INVESTING IN FAMILIES AND TO BETTER MEET THE
NEEDS OF OUR CITY I'M ASKING THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER A FEW
ADJUSTMENTS. LET ME START IN THE AREA OF
EDUCATION. SO WE ARE VERY PROUD WITH THIS
BUDGET TO BE MAKING THE SINGLE LARGEST INVESTMENT IN PUBLIC
EDUCATION IN THE HISTORY OF OUR CITY.
OVER $1.5 BILLION REPRESENTING AN INCREASE OF 7.1% OVER LAST
YEAR'S BUDGET. IT MEANS THAT EVERY STUDENT
ACROSS OUR CITY IN BOTH SECTORS WILL HAVE THE RESOURCES THAT
THEY NEED. TODAY, WE ARE AMENDING OUR
BUDGET REQUEST IN THE FORM OF AN ERRATA LETTER THAT WE SEND EVERY
YEAR AND INCLUDED IN OUR ERRATA LETTER IS A 3.86 MILLION DOLLAR
IN THE D.C. PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM AND A $3.28 MILLION INCREASE TO
THE D.C. PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL SYSTEM.
THESE INCREASES WOULD EFFECTIVELY GET DCPS AND THE
D.C. PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOLS TO A BUDGET THAT REFLECTS A 2%
INCREASE OVER LAST YEAR'S PER-STUDENT FUNDING FORMULA.
LET ME ALSO MOVE TO THE AREA OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
I THINK YOU KNOW IN OUR BUDGET WE INCLUDED A NEW PROGRAM CALLED
THE RETURNING CITIZENS PORTAL REENTRY PROGRAM, AND IN THE
ERRATA LETTER WE CLEARLY OUTLINE WHAT THIS NEW RETURNING CITIZENS
PORTAL WILL DO, THE STAFF IT NEEDS TO DO IT AND THE AGENCIES
WE WILL BE WORKING WITH, WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS TO
DO IT. 2.3 MILLION DOLLAR ENHANCEMENT
WILL CONTINUE TO SHOW UP IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS BUDGET
BUT LET ME JUST SAY A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW THOSE FUNDS WILL
BE USED. 1.1 MILLION DOLLARS WILL PROVIDE
CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, TRANSPORTATION TO THE PORTAL OF
ENTRY FACILITY AND THE CONTINUUM OF CARE.
$500,000 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO SNAP EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS AND
TRAINING. $350,000 WILL COVER MENTAL
HEALTH ASSESSMENTS AND SERVICES. OVER $270,000 WILL BE SPENT ON
RENOVATIONS FOR THE FACILITY ITSELF, THE PORTAL OF ENTRY AT
DOC. $65,000 WILL BE DEVOTED TO THE
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE.
$50,000 TO DRIVER'S LICENSE AND IDENTIFICATION SERVICES.
I ALSO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT OUR INVESTMENT AS OUR COMMITMENT TO
THE NEAR ACT LEGISLATION. IN THE OFFICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
SAFETY AND ENGAGEMENT. WE ALSO WANTED TO CLEARLY
DELINEATE THE STAFF THAT WOULD BE ASSIGNED TO PARTICULAR
ACTIVITIES IN THIS AREA. THEY INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY
STABILIZATION PROGRAM, THE SAFER STRONGER D.C. PROGRAM AND
PORTIONS OF OUR ROVING LEADERS PROGRAM.
NEXT I WANTED TO SAY A BIT ABOUT HOMELESSNESS.
WE ARE VERY PROUD TO REPORT THAT WE HAVE MADE A DRAMATIC
IMPROVEMENT IN ENDING FAMILY HOMELESSNESS AND OVERALL
HOMELESSNESS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN THE LAST YEAR.
TWO YEARS AGO, WE MADE THE BOLD PROMISE TO END HOMELESSNESS IN
WASHINGTON, AND BECAUSE OF OUR HOMEWARD D.C. PROGRAM, OUR
STRATEGIC PLAN AND A CONSISTENT FUNDING AND VERY FOCUSED
LEADERSHIP WE ARE BEGINNING TO FULFILL THAT PROMISE.
WITH THE COUNCIL'S SUPPORT WE ARE INVESTING MORE IN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING THAN ANY OTHER JURISDICTION LIKE OURS IN THE
COUNTRY. WE LAUNCHED A NEW HOMELESS
SERVICES PREVENTION PROGRAM AND WE INCREASED OUR INVESTMENTS TO
PERMANENT HOUSING PROGRAMS -- TO HOUSING PROGRAMS LIKE RAPID
REHOUSING, TARGETED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND NEARLY -- AND WE'VE
INCREASED THOSE EFFORTS BY NEARLY 60%.
WE HAVE ALSO DEVELOPED INTERIM ELIGIBILITY WHICH PROVIDES
IMMEDIATE SHELTER FOR FAMILIES IN URGENT NEED.
WE HELPED MORE THAN 2700 FAMILIES AVOID HOMELESSNESS
USING OUR SYSTEM AND WE CONNECTED MORE THAN 1800
VETERANS TO PERMANENT HOUSING. AND THROUGH A THREE-YEAR $9
MILLION GRANT AWARDED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
WE EXPANDED OUR OUTREACH TO CHRONICALLY HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS
AND PEOPLE WITH SUBSTANCE USE AND MENTAL ILLNESS DISORDERS.
AND WE HAVE A VERY FORWARD-LOOKING PLAN FOR D.C.
GENERAL. OVER ALL THE NUMBER OF PERSONS
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DECREASED
BY 10.5% FROM THE 2016 POINT IN TIME COUNT.
THE DECREASE IN 2016 IS LARGELY ATTRIBUTED TO A 21.8% REDUCTION
IN THE NUMBER OF FAMILIES EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN THE
POINT IN TIME COUNT. THE NUMBER OF UNACCOMPANIED
INDIVIDUALS AS WELL IS DOWN 2.7% FROM 2016 AND DOWN 6.2% OVER
ALL. IN THE LAST TWO YEARS.
THERE ARE OF COURSE OTHER CHANGES, PROBABLY ABOUT A DOZEN
CHANGES, SOME TECHNICAL IN NATURE THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE
ERRATA LETTER AND ONE ADDITIONAL THAT I WILL ADD IS THAT THE
COUNCIL GAVE US AUTHORITY TO USE IMMINENT DOMAIN ON A FACILITY ON
W STREET IN WARD 5 AND WE HAVE TIGHT END UP THAT LANGUAGE AND
DIRECTED ITS USE TOWARDS FLEET MAINTENANCE AND THAT IS ALSO
INCLUDED IN THE ERRATA THAT WE ARE ASKING THE COUNCIL SUPPORT
FOR. SO WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER YOUR
QUESTIONS. YES?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION UNRELATED TO THE BUDGET.
>> MAYOR: OKAY. >> COUNCILMEMBER DAVID GROSSO
SAID YESTERDAY THAT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL TOLD HIM THAT
TWO OF YOUR APPOINTEES IN YOUR ADMINISTRATION RECEIVED
PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT IN SCHOOL PLACEMENTS BY KAYA HENDERSON.
DO YOU KNOW WHO THEY ARE? >> MAYOR: I CAN'T TALK ABOUT
THE REPORT AND I DON'T KNOW WHO ELSE IS TALKING ABOUT THE REPORT
BUT OUR DIRECTION FROM THE INSPECTOR GENERAL WAS TO KEEP
THE REPORT CONFIDENTIAL. I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE ARE AWARE
THAT AS YOU HAVE REPORTED THAT ONE OF OUR CABINET MEMBERS ASKED
FOR A DISCRETIONARY REPLACEMENT AND RECEIVED IT.
WE ARE AWARE IN THE REPORT AND I CAN'T TALK ABOUT THE PARTICULARS
OF THE REPORT BUT WE DON'T KNOW OF ANOTHER CABINET MEMBER THAT
WAS INVOLVED. >> YOU DON'T KNOW OF ANOTHER
CABINET MEMBER THAT WAS INVOLVED?
>> NO. >> OKAY.
WAS THE PERSON STANDING TO YOUR RIGHT RASHAD YOUNG THE CITY
ADMINISTRATOR, DID HE RECEIVE DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT FROM
KAYA HENDERSON? I COULD ASK HIM THAT AS WELL.
>> MAYOR: I CAN TELL YOU THAT RASHAD YOUNG'S CHILDREN
PARTICIPATED IN THE LOTTERY. THEY WERE MATCHED IN THE LOTTERY
AND HIS CHILDREN ATTEND A SCHOOL WHERE THEY WERE MATCHED.
>> OKAY. >> THE MAYOR YESTERDAY HAD ASKED
YOU IF YOU HAD SPOKEN ABOUT THIS DEPUTY MAYOR SNOWDEN AND YOU
SAID I ASSUME SHE DID THE RIGHT THING BY CONTACTING THE
CHANCELLOR. DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH
HER AT ALL ABOUT THIS WHEN YOU FIRST FOUND OUT AND CAN YOU TELL
ME WHEN YOU FIRST FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS?
>> MAYOR: I WON'T BE ABLE TO TELL YOU EXACTLY WHEN BUT I HAVE
A REGULAR MEETING WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL USUALLY ONCE A
QUARTER WHERE HE UPDATES ME. HE ASKS ME IF THERE IS ANYTHING
BUT I LIKE HIM TO LOOK INTO AND HE WILL GIVE ME AN UPDATE ON THE
THINGS HE IS WORKING ON AND IN ONE OF OUR RECENT MEETINGS HE
GAVE ME AN UPDATE AND TOLD ME HE WAS INVESTIGATING THE FORMER
CHANCELLOR IN HER DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENTS AND THAT HE WOULD BE
FORWARDING HIS REPORT TO THE BOARD OF ETHICS AND GOVERNMENT
ACCOUNTABILITY. HE WAS ALSO VERY SPECIFIC IN
SAYING I BELIEVE THAT HE SAID THAT THERE WERE -- THERE WAS A
CABINET MEMBER INVOLVED, GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS INVOLVED
AND PRIVATE CITIZENS INVOLVED, BUT THEY WEREN'T THE SUBJECT OF
HIS INVESTIGATION. AND HE WAS CAREFUL TO SAY THAT
BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T THE SUBJECT OF HIS INVESTIGATION AND
SUSPECTED OF MY WRONGDOING THAT THEIR NAMES WOULD NOT BE
RELEASED. HE WAS ALSO FOCUSED ON THE FACT
THAT CHILDREN WERE INVOLVED IN THE RELEASE OF THOSE NAMES.
>> DO YOU DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS ANY WRONGDOING?
>> MAYOR: WHAT I BELIEVE IS I HAVE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S
REPORT AND HE IS CONCERNED THAT THE CHANCELLOR'S DECISION MAKING
WAS PARTIAL. AND THAT THAT WAS HIS FINDING.
I DO KNOW THIS, MATT, THAT THE CHANCELLOR HAS THE LEGAL
AUTHORITY TO MAKE IN EXCEPTIONAL CASES DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENTS.
WE ALL, EVERYBODY IN THE GOVERNMENT, HAS THE OBLIGATION
TO FOLLOW THE RULES, AND I DO THINK THAT THE DEPUTY MAYOR DID
WHAT WAS AVAILABLE TO HER AND THE CHANCELLOR MADE THE
DECISION. THE CHANCELLOR IS THE EDUCATOR
IN THIS EQUATION AND IN THE BEST POSITION TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
>> JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS I THINK THE MESSAGE FROM YOUR
PRESS OFFICE HAS GOTTEN IS THAT THERE WAS A THOUGHT IT WAS WITH
THE CHANCELLOR FOR HOW SHE MADE THESE REPLACEMENTS THE FAULT
WASN'T WITH THE PEOPLE WHO ASKED HER TO MAKE THOSE.
>> MAYOR: I THINK THERE IS SOME FAULT IN THE PROCESS AND THIS IS
WHAT WE ARE VERY FOCUSED ON AND TO BE MORE CLEAR ABOUT MY
RESPONSE, TO MATT, IS WE WANT THE CHANCELLOR TO BE IN THE BEST
POSITION TO HAVE PARAMETERS TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS BECAUSE ANY
TIME THERE IS A DISCRETIONARY DECISION THERE WILL BE QUESTIONS
ABOUT IT. SO WE THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO
HAVE SOME PARAMETERS THERE SO THAT IT IS VERY CLEAR HOW THE
CHANCELLOR MAKES DECISIONS. AND THAT IS WHAT WE COMMUNICATED
TO CHANCELLOR WILSON. >> BUT THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAD
SPECIAL ACCESS TO THE CHANCELLOR BECAUSE THEY ARE IN YOUR
ADMINISTRATION, THEY WORK CLOSELY WITH HER AND WHAT
ASSURANCES DO PEOPLE HAVE OR SHOULD THEY HAVE THAT, YOU KNOW,
JUST BY PROXIMITY KEEP ON GETTING SPECIAL TREATMENT?
>> >> MAYOR: I THINK THEY SHOULD
KNOW THAT I EXPECT WHAT MY EXPECTATIONS ARE FOR MEMBERS
THAT I APPOINT AND FOR PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THE GOVERNMENT IS
THAT THEY FOLLOW THE RULES AND THEY ACT WITH INTEGRITY.
IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE ALL OF THE PROCESSES ARE IN
PLACE TO HAVE ADEQUATE CHECKS ON THAT.
AND QUITE FRANKLY THAT'S WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT.
>> SO DO YOU ANTICIPATE, DO YOU THINK THAT THE DEPUTY MAYOR DID
SOMETHING WRONG BY ASKING FOR THIS PLACEMENT?
>> MAYOR: WELL, I KNOW WHAT THE IG HAS FOUND, WHAT THE IG
SUGGESTS. >> BUT WHAT DID YOU DECIDE?
I MEAN THIS IS THE ETHICS. >> MAYOR: LET ME FINISH.
THERE IS AN INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REPORT AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FOUND THAT PEOPLE WHO SOUGHT BOTH INSIDE THE GOVERNMENT AND
OUTSIDE THE GOVERNMENT WHO SOUGHT A DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT
WERE NOT FOUND TO HAVE DONE ANYTHING WRONG.
YES? MARTIN?
>> FOLLOWING UP ON THIS LINE OF QUESTION DEPUTY MAYOR SNOWDEN IN
HER STATEMENT SAID SHE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF AN OPPORTUNITY THAT
IS AVAILABLE TO ANY D.C. RESIDENT BUT I GUARANTEE D.C.
RESIDENTS DON'T KNOW THIS IS AVAILABLE AND B DON'T KNOW THEY
CAN E-MAIL THE CHANCELLOR OR CALL HER.
DO YOU HAVE A SENSE THERE COULD BE THE LOOK AT PROXIMITY COULD
BE GRANTED AN OPPORTUNITY? >> MAYOR: THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT
IT COULD LOOK LIKE. ALTHOUGH I WILL TELL YOU THAT
RESIDENTS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WHO DON'T WORK FOR THE
GOVERNMENT HAVE DONE EXACTLY THAT.
SOME HAVE BEEN AWARDED, SOME HAVE BEEN DENIED.
PEOPLE IN THE GOVERNMENT ACCORDING TO THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL HAVE ASKED FOR SOME WERE GRANTED AND SOME WERE DENIED SO
I THINK WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS WHAT THE PROCESS IS AND WHAT THE
PARAMETERS ARE. AND IT IS CERTAINLY, BACK TO
AARON'S POINT, MY EXPECTATION THAT ALL MEMBERS OF MY CABINET
AND BELOW THAT NOT JUST THE CABINET I APPOINT THEM BUT
EVERYBODY BELOW THE CABINET LEVEL, TOO, ARE OPERATING WITH
INTEGRITY. >> ONE MORE FROM ME.
I HEARD THAT YOU SAID YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE CURRENT
CHANCELLOR ABOUT THIS. DID YOU TELL HIM ANY GUIDELINES
YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE? >> MAYOR: YES.
SO WE HAD -- I REFERRED THIS MATTER TO MY GENERAL COUNSEL WHO
IS ACTUALLY MY DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL,
ASKED HER TO DEVELOP SOME IDEAS THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT
GUIDELINES AND I THINK THAT THE GENERAL COUNSEL AND THE DEPUTY
MAYOR FOR EDUCATION HAD THAT DISCUSSION WITH CHANCELLOR
WILSON. >> WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHO THE
SECOND APPOINTEE IN YOUR ADMINISTRATION IS WHO RECEIVED
PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT FROM KAYA HENDERSON?
>> MAYOR: I'M NOT SURE IF YOU HAVE REVIEWED THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL'S REPORT. >> I HAVEN'T SEEN THE REPORT,
NO. >> MAYOR: OKAY.
BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT SECOND PERSON WHO WAS REFERRING
TO. I HAVE A GUESS AND I DO BELIEVE
THAT IT WAS REFERRING TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR, BUT THE
FACTS DON'T MATCH WITH WHAT WE KNOW.
SO IF THAT PERSON THAT THEY ARE REFERRING TO -- I JUST DON'T
THINK THE FACTS MATCH. >> IS THERE A REASON YOU DIDN'T
ASK THE INSPECTOR GENERAL WHO THE PEOPLE ARE?
>> MAYOR: THE INSPECTOR GENERAL WHEN HE DOES AN INVESTIGATION
ALMOST NEVER TELLS ME THAT HE IS DOING AN INVESTIGATION UNTIL THE
INVESTIGATION HAS CONCLUDED. AND IN THIS CASE HE HAS
IDENTIFIED TO ME JUST LIKE HE HAS TO EVERYBODY ELSE WHO HE
THINKS THE WRONGED PARTY IS AND HE WOULD NOT DIVULGE THE OTHER
PARTIES. >> I GUESS FROM THE PUBLIC'S
STANDPOINT HERE WE'RE STRUGGLING BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE
RESPONSIBILITY IS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
HE DID THIS INVESTIGATION. HE GAVE IT TO YOU.
IT SEEMS NOW THE RESPONSIBILITY IS YOURS TO DECIDE WHAT
DISCIPLINARY ACTION. >> MAYOR: I HAVE DECIDED THAT.
>> BUT IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO FIND OUT WHO THE LAST PERSON IS
WE'RE JUST GOING TO KEEP ASKING. >> MAYOR: I DIDN'T SAY I WASN'T
GOING TO FIND OUT. WE -- I CAN TELL YOU THAT WHO WE
BELIEVE THAT HE WAS REFERRING TO, EVEN EARLIER WHEN WE WERE
MADE AWARE OF THE REPORT WE TRIED TO CORRECT ANY INFORMATION
AND HOPEFULLY THAT INFORMATION WILL BE CORRECTED.
>> WHO DO YOU BELIEVE HE IS REFERRING TO?
>> MAYOR: I JUST TOLD YOU. >> THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR?
>> MAYOR: YES. >> OKAY.
BUT HE DID NOT RECEIVE DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT?
>> MAYOR: I TOLD YOU THAT HIS CHILDREN PARTICIPATED IN THE
LOTTERY. THEY WERE MATCHED AND THAT'S THE
SCHOOL THAT THEY ATTEND. >> SO THAT MEANS THEY DID NOT
RECEIVE A DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT FROM THE CHANCELLOR?
>> MAYOR: I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT MYSELF.
WHAT'S THE NEXT QUESTION? YES, A QUESTION BEHIND YOU.
>> JUST A BASIC QUESTION ON PROCESS AND I CALLED DCPS ASKING
THEM FOR NUMBERS AS TO HOW MANY TIMES DISCRETION WAS USED AND
WHAT THE RESULT OF THE DISCRETION IS, NOT NAMES AND
SCHOOLS AND JUST A ROUND NUMBER AND THEY SAID EITHER THEY ARE
NOT PROVIDING IT OR THEY JUST DON'T HAVE IT.
DO YOU THINK DCPS SHOULD MAKE THOSE NUMBERS AVAILABLE, MAKE
THEM AVAILABLE TO ANOTHER CITY AGENCY SO THERE CAN BE A BACK
AND FORTH AND CHECKS AND BALANCES TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU
ARE NOT -- >> MAYOR: I'M HAPPY TO CHECK
THAT, MARTIN. I KNOW THAT THE REPORT REFERS TO
A PERIOD OF TIME. I DON'T REMEMBER THE NUMBERS OFF
OF THE TOP BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF HANDFULS OF CASES.
IN THAT PERIOD OF TIME. YES, SIR?
>> TO BE CLEAR YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE IG SAYS THAT RASHAD
YOUNG IS THE SECOND CABINET MEMBER?
>> MAYOR: I DIDN'T SAY THAT. >> CAN YOU CLEAR THAT UP?
>> MAYOR: ACTUALLY IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT IT APPEARS THAT
THE REPORT WAS SHARED WHEN WE WERE SPECIFICALLY ASKED NOT TO
SHARE THE REPORT SO THAT THERE ARE THINGS ABOUT THE REPORT THAT
I CANNOT SAY BUT THIS IS MY READ ON THE REPORT.
AND THIS IS WHAT WE BELIEVE. WE BELIEVE THAT THERE IS AN
ERROR TALKING ABOUT A SECOND CABINET OFFICIAL.
THAT THE IG BELIEVES THAT A SECOND CABINET OFFICIAL WAS
GIVEN A DISCRETIONARY APPOINTMENT.
WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT THERE WAS A LOTTERY PARTICIPATION FOR THE
CHILDREN AND THEY WERE MATCHED. SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE
HAVE TO WORK OUT. WE HAVE A CALL AND I THINK FOR
THE SECOND TIME WE LET THE IG KNOW WE THINK THERE IS A
MISTAKE. >> SO WHERE IS THAT INFORMATION
COMING FROM THAT THERE IS A SECOND PERSON?
>> MAYOR: IT IS IN THE REPORT. >> THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR IS
IDENTIFIED IN THE REPORT? >> MAYOR: PETER, YOU KNOW HE IS
NOT. >> OKAY.
I MEAN BY JOB TITLE BUT NOT BY NAME.
>> MAYOR: HE IS NOT. >> SO HOW DO YOU KNOW IT IS HIM?
>> MAYOR: WE DON'T -- IN READING ALL OF THESE THINGS
WE'RE TRYING TO PIECE INFORMATION TOGETHER ABOUT WHO
WE THINK SOMETHING IS. >> IS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL NOT
WILLING TO TELL YOU WHO THEY ARE?
>> MAYOR: I DON'T -- >> I'M JUST ASKING.
>> MAYOR: OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK, AS I
MENTIONED WE TOLD HIM THAT WE THINK THERE IS INCORRECT
INFORMATION ABOUT THE SECOND INDIVIDUAL.
WE TOLD HIM THAT AND WE WILL TELL HIM AGAIN.
>> FIVE MINUTES AGO YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T THINK THERE WAS A SECOND
PERSON AND THEN LATER NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT YOU SENT
INFORMATION TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL BECAUSE YOU THINK THEY
ARE TALKING ABOUT THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR.
>> MAYOR: I THINK WE ARE SAYING THE SAME THING.
I DON'T WANT YOU TO SUGGEST I'M SAYING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
WE DON'T BELIEVE A SECOND PERSON IN THE CABINET RECEIVED A
DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT. >> SO THERE IS A BRIEFING YOU
HAD WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO AND AT THAT
MEETING WHEN YOU WERE HAVING THAT MEETING DID YOU THINK THAT
HE WAS REFERRING TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR IN THAT MEETING?
>> MAYOR: THAT MEETING DIDN'T GO INTO DETAILS ABOUT WHO WAS --
I DIDN'T HAVE A REPORT. IT DIDN'T GO INTO DETAILS.
>> AT SOME POINT AFTER THAT MEETING YOU OR SOMEONE IN YOUR
STAFF BELIEVES THE REPORT IS REFERRING TO THE CITY
ADMINISTRATOR? >> MAYOR: YES.
>> AND THEN YOU OR SOMEONE IN YOUR ADMINISTRATION FORWARDS THE
INFORMATION TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL SAYING IF YOU THINK IT
IS THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR WE DON'T THINK IT IS THE CITY
ADMINISTRATOR? >> MAYOR: YES.
>> AND YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING BACK FROM THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL? >> MAYOR: WE SAW THE REPORT.
>> SO THIS IS BEFORE THE REPORT? >> MAYOR: IT WAS BEFORE IT WAS
CIRCULATED OR AFTER IT WAS CIRCULATED.
IT WAS AFTER IT WAS CIRCULATED. >> WHAT REASON DID YOU HAVE TO
THINK THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR IS THE SECOND INDIVIDUAL
IDENTIFIED? >> MAYOR: SOME LINES IN THE
REPORT GAVE US THAT BELIEF. >> CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT THE
LINES WERE? >> MAYOR: I THINK YOU KNOW I
CAN'T TALK ABOUT THE REPORT IN SPECIFICS.
>> SO GENERALLY THINK YOU THERE IS MISINFORMATION IN THE
INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REPORT? >> MAYOR: WE THINK THERE MAY BE
AN ERROR, YES. >> SO IS THAT PLAYING INTO THE
FACT THAT YOU DON'T SEEM TO THINK THAT WHATEVER WAS
DISCUSSED IN THE REPORT ABOUT THE WAY PEOPLE ASKED FOR
PLACEMENTS BY THE CHANCELLOR -- >> MAYOR: AARON, THIS IS WHAT
THE KEY TAKE-AWAY I THINK SHOULD BE ON THIS ISSUE.
I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY QUESTION ABOUT DISCRETIONARY
PLACEMENTS IN OUR ADMINISTRATION.
AND I RECOGNIZE, THOUGH, THAT THE CHANCELLOR NEEDS TO HAVE
THAT ABILITY BECAUSE IN A SCHOOL SYSTEM THAT HAS OVER 45,000 KIDS
THE CHANCELLOR IS GOING TO NEED TO HAVE THE ABILITY AT SOME
POINTS TO MAKE A DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT.
WE WANT IT TO BE VERY CLEAR, A SET OF PARAMETERS HOW THE
CHANCELLOR SHOULD ADDRESS THOSE DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENTS.
AND THAT'S REALLY THE MOST I CAN SAY ABOUT IT.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE A TIGHT ENOUGH PROCESS FOR
ANYBODY, FOR A PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT OR WHO DON'T
WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT AND WE'RE GOING TO FIX THAT.
IS THERE ANOTHER QUESTION? >> MAYOR, I CAME IN LATE AND I
APOLOGIZE. DID YOU SAY OR DID YOU NOT SAY
WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK KAYA HENDERSON MADE ANY MISTAKES?
>> MAYOR: I THINK -- WHAT I JUST TOLD AARON IS WE NEED A
TIGHTER PROCESS FOR CHANCELLOR WILSON AND FOR THE NEXT
CHANCELLOR. WHAT I BELIEVE IS THAT THE
CHANCELLOR NEEDS SOME DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY BUT I
WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR FOR ANYBODY WHO WORKS INSIDE OF THE
GOVERNMENT OR OUTSIDE OF THE GOVERNMENT WHAT THE PARAMETERS
ARE THAT THE CHANCELLOR REFERRED TO WHEN MAKING THOSE DECISIONS
AND WE'VE COMMUNICATED THAT TO CHANCELLOR WILSON.
>> TOM, YOU HAVE THE LAST QUESTION.
>> MAYOR: GO AHEAD. >> THE SUBJECT AT HAND, THE
INCREASE IN PER PUPIL FUNDING. WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM?
IS IT ONE-TIME MONEY OR RECURRING MONEY?
>> MAYOR: GOOD QUESTION. >> WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THE
ADVOCATES WHO SAY LISTEN WE NEED 5% THIS IS ONLY 2%.
>> MAYOR: SO WE FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT OUR BUDGET REQUEST REFLECTS
WHAT SCHOOLS NEED. THERE IS A STRONG SENSE OUT
THERE THAT THE ADDITIONAL.5% WILL ACTUALLY GET THEM CLOSER TO
GETTING NOT ONLY OVER THE COST OF LIVING BUT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE ARE WORKING ON.
THIS IS A ONE-TIME INFUSION BUT WE KNOW THAT WE ARE ABLE TO WORK
THAT ONE-TIME INFUSION INTO OUR NEXT BUDGET CYCLE.
SO IT ACTUALLY REPRESENTS A.5 INCREASE TO THE PER PUPIL
FORMULA BUT BECAUSE IT IS ONE TIME IT IS BASICALLY LIKE TWO I
DON'T WANT TO SAY GRANTS BUT TWO PAYMENTS.
THAT WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT OF GETTING TO 2% INCREASE.
YES, SIR? >> SO THE [INAUDIBLE] SAYS THAT
THE FUNDING SET ASIDE FOR WILSON ISN'T FOLLOWING THE FORMULA FOR
D.C. UNIFORM PER STUDENT FUNDING FORMULA.
DOES THIS BUDGET ADD MORE FUNDING FOR WILSON?
>> MAYOR: THIS BUDGET ADDS MORE FUNDING FOR ALL OF D.C. PUBLIC
SCHOOLS. THE AMENDMENT IS NOT PARTICULAR
TO A SCHOOL. WHAT THE 3.8 MILLION DOLLARS
WILL GET IS AN INCREASE PER STUDENT FOR ALL OF THE SCHOOLS.
>> SO WHAT DO YOU SAY TO PARENTS OF WILSON WHO SAY THE SCHOOL IS
NOT GETTING ENOUGH FUNDING ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S OWN
FUNDING FORMULA? >> MAYOR: I DON'T THINK THAT'S
THE CASE. WE HAVE TO PROVIDE FUNDING PER
STUDENT ACCORDING TO THE LAW. >> THE WARD SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER
SAYS THERE WILL BE CUTS AT WILSON AND THAT FOLLOWS A LARGER
TREND THAN STAFF BEING LET GO IN THE LAST THREE YEARS AT WILSON.
[INAUDIBLE] >> MAYOR: MAY I GET YOU MORE
INFORMATION SPECIFIC TO WILSON'S BUDGET BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW IT
OFF THE TOP. >> CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE ANIMAL
CONTROL ISSUES? AND WHY JUST TO START WITH WHY
WERE THESE POLICY CHANGES PUT INTO THE BUDGET?
>> MAYOR: I THINK THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR WANTS TO ANSWER
THAT QUESTION. >> I SURE DO.
SO WHEN WE MOVE THE BSA AND MOVE THE BUDGET IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR US TO LOOK AT WHAT KINDS OF THINGS WE NEED TO GET DONE AND
ACCOMPLISHED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AND THE BEST VEHICLE TO DO IT.
SO WE PLACE THE PROVISION IN THE BSA AND WE'VE DONE THAT IN
SIMILAR YEARS TO PUT OTHER KINDS OF CHANGES OR BILLS IN THE
BUDGET SUPPORT ACT. WE REMOVED IT BECAUSE, IN FACT,
WE HEARD A LOT OF CONVERSATION AND CONSTERNATION FRANKLY FROM
THE COMMUNITY ABOUT IT SO WE DECIDED TO TAKE IT OUT AND MOVE
IT THROUGH IF WE COME BACK TO IT MOVE IT THROUGH THE REGULAR
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS WHERE WE HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS
THIS ISSUE AND WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IS TO MAKE SURE THAT
HEALTH AND SAFETY IS PROTECTED IN THE COMMUNITY AND HAVE SOME
GUIDELINES ABOUT HOW WE WOULD DEAL WITH CHICKENS IN PARTICULAR
AND THE SAFETY AND HEALTH ISSUES THAT THEY PRESENT.
>> WHY DID THIS BUBBLE UP AS A, YOU KNOW, AN ISSUE THIS YEAR?
WHY IN THIS BUDGET? >> WELL, WE -- THINGS BUBBLE UP
ALL OF THE TIME THAT WE TAKE A LOOK AT
THE HEALTH DIRECTOR HAS BEEN LOOKING AT THIS ISSUE FOR SOME
TIME AND SHE WAS READY TO MAKE A SERIES OF CHANGES TO THE
PROVISIONS AND LAWS THAT GOVERN ANIMAL CONTROL.
SO THE TIMING JUST FITS WITH WHAT WE WERE -- THE TIMING FITS
WITH WHAT WE WERE DOING WITH THE BUDGET.
>> SO NOT A WAR ON PETS? >> THIS IS NOT A WAR ON PETS,
NO. >> MR. YOUNG, DID YOU MAKE THE
DECISION TO DROP THIS BECAUSE THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO
TESTIFIED AT A HEARING? >> IT WAS A COLLECTIVE DECISION.
WE ALL LOOK AT THE HEARING PROCESS, THE MAYOR AND MYSELF
AND THE AGENCY DIRECTORS AND SO WE ALL GOT TO THE SAME POINT
AROUND THE SAME TIME THAT WE ALL AGREED THAT WE OUGHT TO TAKE
THIS PROVISION OUT. >> AND WHAT IT PUTS OUT NOW,
TELL US. >> THE ENTIRE SECTION THAT DEALT
WITH CHANGES TO REGULATIONS OF ANIMALS SO THERE WAS A CAT
LICENSING ISSUE, THERE WAS A CHICKEN ISSUE, I THINK THERE WAS
A FERRET ISSUE THAT TOM ASKED ME ABOUT AD NAUSEAM SO THAT ENTIRE
SECTION WE REMOVED. >> SO PEOPLE CAN KEEP CHICKENS,
CATS DON'T HAVE TO HAVE LICENSES?
>> WELL, NOW, LET'S BE CLEAR ABOUT CHICKENS.
WE HAVE LIFTED THE PROVISION THAT FURTHER RESTRICTS THE USE
OF CHICKENS BUT HAVING CHICKENS IN ONE'S BACKYARD IS NOT THE
BEST IDEA. SO THERE IS A REAL HEALTH AND
SAFETY ISSUE THERE SO WE WILL HAVE TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE ARE
GOING TO REVISIT THIS ISSUE. >> BUT IT IS LEGAL AT THE
MOMENT? >> MAYOR: I THINK WHAT WE DID
WITH THIS PROVISION WAS CLARIFY IT BECAUSE THERE IS GRAY AREAS
AROUND CHICKEN REGULATION AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHICKENS.
GRAY AREAS AROUND CHICKEN REGULATION SO THE IDEA WAS NEVER
THAT WE'RE AGAINST ANIMALS, WE LOVE ANIMALS, MAYBE NOT PENGUINS
-- NO, TOO SOON? OKAY.
BUT WE I THINK THAT YOU ASKED WHY DID WE COME TO THIS DECISION
AND SOMETIMES WE INCLUDE THINGS AND ALL MAYORS HAVE INCLUDED
THINGS THAT HAVE SOME RELATION TO THE BUDGET BUT MAYBE WE
DECIDED THAT THIS WOULD BE BETTER TO DISCUSS IN A
STAND-ALONE MATTER AND BEFORE WE BRING IT BACK WE WILL HAVE
COMMUNITY DISCUSSION. >> BUT YOU DO PLAN TO BAN
CHICKENS IN BACK YARDS? >> MAYOR: WE'RE GOING TO HAVE
COMMUNITY DISCUSSION AND MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT WE THINK IS
BEST FOR THE CITY. >> MAY I ASK ABOUT FERRETS?
>> MAYOR: I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT FERRETS BUT WE CAN DISCUSS
IT AT ANOTHER POINT. YES?
>> MAYOR, YOU TAKE THE EDUCATION FUNDING CHANGES AND THE PET
REMOVAL ISSUES, THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF CHANGES IN THIS
BUDGET. >> MAYOR: IT IS ABOUT ACTUALLY
ABOUT THE SAME. WE'VE HAD ERRATA LETTERS THAT
WERE A LITTLE BIT LONGER. SO IT IS ACTUALLY NOT --
>> YOU DO A LOT OF OUTREACH EARLY ON IN COMMUNITY MEETINGS.
>> MAYOR: WE DO. >> DID YOU NOT GET THE SENSE
FROM THE COMMUNITY THIS TIME THAT SCHOOLS WERE, YOU KNOW,
THAT THAT 2% WAS GOING TO BE AS IMPORTANT?
>> MAYOR: NO, LET ME BE CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING.
OUR BUDGET EVEN BEFORE THIS ERRATA LETTER REPRESENTS $100
MILLION INCREASE IN SCHOOLS SO SCHOOLS REMAINS OUR NUMBER ONE
PRIORITY. WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE A SMALL
ADJUSTMENT AND WE WILL MAKE THAT ADJUSTMENT IN FUTURE YEARS TO
TRY TO GET AS CLOSE TO -- TO TRY TO GET VERY CLOSE TO THE COST OF
LIVING PLUS IF WE CAN. FROM YEAR TO YEAR.
>> THANKS, EVERYONE. >> MAYOR: THANK YOU, EVERYBODY.
For more infomation >> Gift Ideas For Mom - Duration: 6:14. 
For more infomation >> Are you gonna talk to her? - Duration: 3:06. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét