Guess What Crackhead, Boozebum, Ex-Con, Whore-Hopping, Tax-Dodging, Former D.C. Mayor Got Arrested Last Night?
John Fartlington Poopnagel
No details, but you can bet Barry was up -- or down -- to NO GOOD!
atadhorny
a.) The ex got angry at Barry when his Cialis failed to kick in.
b.) Barry forgot to bring his wallet.
c.) Barry's crack dealer didn't show up.
d.) Barry "soiled" his trousers during the drive to the beach.
--------------------------------
"Barry Attorney Adds New Version of Events in Stalking Case "
"D.C. Council Member Had Planned Beach Trip With Ex-Girlfriend, Lawyer
Says"
By Tim Craig, Debbi Wilgoren and Jenna Johnson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, July 6, 2009 11:25 AM
D.C. Council member Marion Barry was planning to spend July 4 in
Rehoboth Beach with an ex-girlfriend but returned with the woman to
Washington Saturday afternoon, hours before being arrested for
allegedly stalking her, Barry's lawyer said this morning.
The attorney, Frederick D. Cooke Jr., told reporters the stalking
charge has no merit and therefore should not impact the former mayor's
probation for tax violations.
"If we are forced to proceed forward in court we will prove that [the
charges] are false," Cooke said, adding that he hoped prosecutors
would simply drop the charges. " . . . because it is my belief that
this charge will not stand up, that there will be no prosecution and
certainly no conviction, I believe it will have zero effect on Mr.
Barry's probation."
Barry, who has struggled with legal and ethical issues for much of his
long political career, has found himself mired anew in political,
legal and personal drama sine being arrested late Saturday.
Barry's latest run-in with the law centers on his relationship with
political consultant Donna Watts-Brighthaupt, who alleges that he
continues to approach her even though they split up a few months ago.
Barry, Watts-Brighthaupt and police gave conflicting accounts of how
the former mayor ended up in police custody Saturday night after
attending several Fourth of July functions.
Cooke, who has long represented Barry, forbade him to speak at this
morning's news conference, but added a new version of the facts
leading up to the arrest, including that Barry and Watts-Brighthaupt
had driven to Annapolis, had lunch and then decided to drive back to
Washington Saturday, instead of continuing on to Rehoboth. Cooke said
Barry spent time at Watts-Brighthaupt's home during the evening, and
was driving home from there when he found himself under arrest in
Anacostia Park. Watts-Brighthaupt was there too, driving a separate
car, and, Cooke said, accompanied by a man who is apparently her ex-
husband.
U.S. Park Service Police said they arrested Barry (D-Ward 8) about
8:45 p.m. in Anacostia Park after a woman flagged down an officer to
report that a man in a nearby vehicle was "bothering her," police
said.
After interviewing Barry and Watts-Brighthaupt, Barry, 73, was charged
with one count of "misdemeanor stalking," said Sgt. David Schlosser, a
Park Police spokesman. Barry, on probation for failing to pay his
federal taxes, was released hours later and ordered to appear in court
Thursday.
Through a spokeswoman yesterday, Barry called the charges unfounded
and asked prosecutors to drop them. Natalie Williams, the spokeswoman,
said that Barry feels "betrayed" because of the emotional and
financial support he has provided Watts-Brighthaupt, 40, over the
years and that he suggested she is unstable. In April, Barry made news
after he paid $800 at an auction to buy Watts-Brighthaupt an opera
jacket even as he struggled to repay back taxes.
Williams said Barry and Watts-Brighthaupt met Saturday afternoon for
lunch before Barry attended several Fourth of July events. On his way
home, Williams said, Barry once again came into contact with Watts-
Brighthaupt near the park after they saw each other's vehicles. "How
are there charges of stalking when they had lunch earlier in the day?"
Williams asked. "It was consensual. . . . There was no hide-and-seek
stalking as one would think when they hear the term."
In an interview, Watts-Brighthaupt said she didn't seek to have Barry
arrested and did not report the encounter to police. Police pulled
over Barry for a traffic violation, she said.
Watts-Brighthaupt, the mother of two girls, says she never felt her
life was in danger as Barry was "trying to catch me." But she said she
has "tons and tons of evidence to prove" that Barry was stalking her
in a way that was not life-threatening.
Barry, through his spokeswoman, alleged that Park Police mistreated
him by holding him for four hours Saturday night before giving him
access to his attorney. Police officials declined to comment on the
specifics of the arrest. Schlosser said the officer who arrested Barry
was a New York native who did not know that Barry was a prominent D.C.
Council member. He said Barry was "very cooperative" during the
booking process.
Watts-Brighthaupt said she worked on Barry's 2008 council campaign as
a paid consultant and they began dating during the Democratic National
Convention last summer. She said they broke up three days before his
kidney transplant in February. "It was a wonderful, insightful,
history-telling experience," she said of their time together.
The two still see each other every other day, she said.
Watts-Brighthaupt said she is angered by the accusations Barry's
spokeswoman made at the news conference. "I'm not emotionally
disturbed. I did not siphon money off him," Watts-Brighthaupt
responded. "I've never asked for a thing. I've never asked for a . . .
thing -- including the $800 opera coat."
If convicted of the stalking charge, Barry could face a year in prison
and a fine up to $500, according to police sources.
The incident marks Barry's third run-in with the Park Police since his
six-month jail term on misdemeanor drug charges in 1992.
In 2002, Park Police said that they found traces of marijuana and
crack cocaine in his car. Barry said the drugs were planted, and
charges were not filed. In 2006, Park Police cited Barry for operating
a vehicle on a suspended license after he was pulled over for driving
too slowly.
The same year, Barry was sentenced to three years of probation for not
submitting federal and D.C. tax returns. In May, Barry's probation was
extended by two years after prosecutors argued that he also failed to
file his 2007 taxes on time.
John Roth, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office, declined to
comment on how the arrest might affect Barry's probation. A source,
who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of
the case, said Barry's arrest is technically a violation of his
probation. But the source added that prosecutors and judges generally
look at the facts of the case before deciding how to proceed.
[Staff writer Matt Zapotosky contributed to this report.]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/06/AR2009070601650.html?hpid=topnews
John Fartlington Poopnagle
Recall when then-mayor Barry spent six months in jail for crack
cocaine "transgressions" with a whore/girlfriend? All on world-famous
videotape? And various whores, eh -- girfriends -- gave him blowjobs
during jail "visits"? (Not on video.)
Well, the ageless Barry has, it seems, never lost his lust for lusty
women.
Now, whether he can still perform is another question.
But nothing, to paraphrase the saying, "Hath more hatred than a whore
scorned."
Or not paid for services rendered.
-----------------
"Ex-Girlfriend Worked for Barry as a Contractor"
By Tim Craig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
WASHINGTON, D.C., COUNCIL MEMBER Marion Barry hired his then-
girlfriend as a city contractor two months after they began a
relationship that eventually led to Barry's arrest on stalking
charges, according to city records.
Barry (D-Ward 8) notified the council secretary's office in October
that his office intended to hire Donna Watts-Brighthaupt as a
contractor specializing in "poverty reduction strategies," according
to the records reviewed by The Washington Post.
Watts-Brighthaupt has been paid $15,000, and the secretary's office
has a purchase order authorizing payment of an additional $5,000,
council officials said.
The money comes from Barry's taxpayer-funded budget as a council
member, and some officials wonder whether it was ethical for the
former mayor to put his girlfriend on the city payroll.
Last night, Barry's spokeswoman, Natalie Williams, called a highly
unusual 11 p.m. news conference at the John A. Wilson Building to
respond to a Washington Post story after it appeared on http://washingtonpost.com.
Williams acknowledged that Barry gave Watts-Brighthaupt the contract.
"The contract was awarded to Ms. Watts because she met the criteria
for the job and the qualifications for the job," Williams said.
Barry also gave her the contract, Williams said, because the
financially strapped Watts-Brighthaupt "was about to lose her house,
her car, due to her inability to find employment."
Barry's representatives have tried to cast Watts-Brighthaupt as
unstable and attempted to further that case at last night's news
conference.
Then a woman who identified herself as Watts-Brighthaupt came running
from behind a TV news truck.
"That's not true. I am Ms. Watts," she said. She then returned to her
car, with news cameras in pursuit.
According to the District's conflict of interest laws, no public
official should use an "official position or public office to obtain
private financial gain for the public official or any member of their
household, or any business with which the public official or any
member of their household is associated."
Members of the household are defined in the statute as spouses,
parents, brothers and sisters and children, as well as their spouses.
The law does not appear to address girlfriends.
"The issue becomes whether [Barry's] relationship would fall into any
of those categories," said Cecily E. Collier-Montgomery, director of
the Office of Campaign Finance. She declined to comment further
because her office could be asked to investigate Barry's hiring of
Watts-Brighthaupt.
When told about the Barry situation, Attorney General Peter J. Nickles
said it was "something I would look into."
Earlier yesterday, Barry's attorney, Frederick D. Cooke Jr., declined
to comment. Reached last night before the news conference, Watts-
Brighthaupt said: "I am competent and educated. No further comment."
According to the contract proposal Barry submitted Oct. 22, Watts-
Brighthaupt was to be paid $2,500 every two weeks to assist Barry in
"the conceptualization, design, planning and moderation of a series of
community meetings and forums designed to obtain public input on
poverty reduction."
"Ms. Brighthaupt is educationally qualified and has worked on similar
projects," Barry wrote.
The initial contract was to run through Dec. 22, but Barry requested
on Dec. 5 that it be canceled. No explanation for the cancellation was
given. On Feb. 20, Barry sent another letter asking that the contract
be reinstated.
On May 22, Barry sent Cynthia Brock-Smith, the secretary of the
council, an invoice asking that she "expedite" a $6,250 payment to
Watts-Brighthaupt for consulting services performed in early February.
"Hopefully, Ms. Brighthaupt can get it tomorrow," Barry wrote.
Watts-Brighthaupt, 40, has been engaged in a nasty public dispute with
Barry since Saturday, when U.S. Park Police charged Barry with
misdemeanor stalking after he allegedly followed Watts-Brighthaupt,
each of them in a different car, into Anacostia Park.
Cooke called the charge "baseless" and predicted that it will be
dismissed by the U.S. attorney's office. Watts-Brighthaupt has said
that she didn't want Barry to be arrested but that she is cooperating
with investigators.
Hours before the arrest, Barry and Watts-Brighthaupt set off for an
overnight trip to Rehoboth Beach, Del. But they got into an argument
over lunch in Annapolis and returned to the District a few hours
later.
Barry and Watts-Brighthaupt have said that they began dating at the
Democratic National Convention in August. At the time, Watts-
Brighthaupt was working as a political consultant for Barry's
reelection campaign. They broke up in February, but they said they
continued to see each other.
The money for Watts-Brighthaupt's contract came from a fund available
to each council member to hire staff. Barry has an annual salary
budget of about $307,000 to hire staff members for his office,
according to council officials.
Barry is also the chairman of the Committee on Housing and Workforce
Development, which gives him access to an additional $380,000 a year
to hire committee staff.
Council members generally have the freedom to hire whomever they
want.
"It's not always apparent what the relationship is between persons or
the precise nature of the relationship," said Brian K. Flowers,
general counsel for the council.
[Staff writer Nikita Stewart contributed to this report.]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/07/AR2009070702123.html?hpid=topnews
John Fartlington Poopnagel
"It's time for the D.C. Council to take action against Marion Barry."
Thursday, July 9, 2009
MARION BARRY is way past the point of being able to further tarnish
his reputation. Sadly, though, he still has the power to damage the
city he is supposed to serve, a fact made painfully clear by
revelations that he apparently used the public payroll to reward and
possibly punish a girlfriend. Even though federal prosecutors have
opted not to press a stalking charge against the former mayor and
current D.C. Council member for Ward 8, Mr. Barry is not fit for
office. It is time that city officials take action.
Acting U.S. Attorney Channing D. Phillips released a statement last
night announcing that no criminal charges would be pursued against Mr.
Barry, who was arrested by Park Service Police on Saturday night after
a dispute with ex-girlfriend Donna Watts-Brighthaupt. That, though,
does not absolve Mr. Barry of the troubling circumstances surrounding
his employment of Ms. Watts-Brighthaupt. As reported by The Post's Tim
Craig, Mr. Barry hired Ms. Watts-Brighthaupt as a consultant in
"poverty reduction strategies" two months after the start of his
relationship with her. At one point, he ordered the $60,000 contract
terminated, only to have it later reinstated. Ms. Watts-Brighthaupt
has received $15,000, with another $5,000 authorized.
In defending Mr. Barry against the stalking charge, representatives
have sought to portray Ms. Watts-Brighthaupt as unstable -- which
prompts the obvious question of why she was hired. "She met the
criteria for the job and the qualifications for the job," Mr. Barry's
spokeswoman gamely said at Tuesday night's surreal news conference. A
better clue as to why Ms. Watts-Brighthaupt was hired can be gleaned
from the embarrassing exchange of voice mails obtained by the City
Paper in which, at one point, Mr. Barry professed to be "addicted" to
the 40-year-old woman. It's disturbing to think that a city facing
such severe financial pressures can hand out precious public money on
the unexamined whim of a besotted council member. More also must be
known about the out-of-town trips that the City Paper reported she
took with Mr. Barry.
We know that because of his iconic political standing there is a
standard response to Mr. Barry's misbehavior: to look away and say
nothing except "that's Marion." That certainly was the case when he so
flagrantly thumbed his nose at obligations to file and pay his federal
income taxes and was permitted to remain on the council's powerful
committee on revenue and finance. The council has no formal mechanism
to censure or discipline a member, but that shouldn't stop Council
Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D) from letting the public know that he
won't tolerate misdeeds that reflect poorly on the city. Mr. Gray
already had ordered council procedures reviewed for a new code of
conduct. Mr. Barry must be admonished, and contracting rules must be
tightened; the city's attorney general also should launch an
investigation into whether any ethical laws were breached.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/08/AR2009070803585.html
atadhorny
By Robert McCartney
Thursday, July 9, 2009
In one respect, Marion Barry has just become one of my personal
heroes. What can I do so when I'm 73, women three decades younger
still go for me?
Part of the answer, it seems, is to arrange to get them $5,000-a-
month, taxpayer-funded contracts for "poverty reduction" work. That's
what D.C. Council member Barry (D-Ward 8) did for his then-girlfriend
Donna Watts-Brighthaupt. It remains to be seen whether anybody's
poverty was reduced besides Watts-Brighthaupt's.
Until my Post colleague Tim Craig revealed the existence of the
contract Tuesday, the latest episode in the Barry soap opera seemed
likely to have little effect. Signs were that it would just provide a
few days of titillating comic relief for a city still recovering from
the tragedies of the Red Line crash and Holocaust Memorial Museum
shooting.
It's been hard to take seriously the allegation that Barry was
stalking Watts-Brighthaupt at Anacostia Park on Saturday. She had
lunch with him earlier that day, and accounts of how he came to be
arrested were contradictory. Sure enough, authorities said yesterday
that they were dropping the charge.
But now that it's come to light that D.C. Council funds were put to
questionable use, it's become a good government issue that needs a
thorough investigation. The District's handling of this will help
signal whether it wants to keep moving away from a political culture
too tolerant of cronyism and self-dealing.
Happily, Mayor Adrian M. Fenty's office made clear it's prepared to
mount an inquiry if the D.C. Council won't police itself. In strongly
worded comments evidently designed to pressure the council to take the
lead, D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles said the city's reputation
was at stake.
"It does not do the city any good, in the eyes of the public and in
the eyes of Congress, to have this kind of fiasco," Nickles said.
Any investigation should focus on whether the public trust has been
violated and how to tighten rules and oversight to keep elected
officials from using public funds to improperly favor personal
acquaintances. The council appears divided on how to proceed. A
spokeswoman for Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D) said the council lacks
authority to probe a member, but council member David A. Catania (I-At
Large) said an accounting is needed.
Watts-Brighthaupt has received $15,000 under the contract, potentially
worth $60,000. It's a puny amount, especially given that the District
faces a $340 million deficit over the next two years, but the
principle is important.
Although the city has made progress toward clean government in recent
years, starting with the administration of Anthony Williams, District
leaders have had a blind spot when it comes to some of Barry's
activities. They've been mostly quiet about his chronic tax problems,
for which he's still on probation and could go to jail.
The reasons for such caution are well-known. It's politically
dangerous to take on Barry, partly because of racial sensitivities
and, for all his failings, Barry is a stalwart, effective
representative of the city's disadvantaged. Their continuing support
of him is a way to stick it to the establishment. It's hard in a
liberal city such as Washington to go aggressively after such a
politician, especially one in poor health who has become an icon.
(Although they represent very different constituencies, Barry's role
as a populist standard-bearer is similar to that of another maverick
politician in the news -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R). They both
champion groups that feel disenfranchised and relish backing
controversial figures who annoy those in charge.)
Still, Fenty and the council should be able to find a way to let Barry
agitate for his causes while reining in his excesses. The contract for
Watts-Brighthaupt provides a good opportunity to crack down, because
there are significant questions about at least four aspects of it.
-- Purpose of contract. Barry and spokeswoman Natalie Williams have
acknowledged that the contract wasn't given just to develop anti-
poverty strategies, a valid public goal, but also to do a good turn
for Watts-Brighthaupt. She was about to lose her house and car, and
Barry was concerned about her children, Williams said.
-- Timing. It can't be a coincidence that Barry discovered that Watts-
Brighthaupt was the perfect candidate to undertake vital anti-poverty
work two months after they started dating.
-- Value of work provided. Investigators will have to look at what
work Watts-Brighthaupt did to earn the money. Based on the documents
available so far, it included designing a brochure and application for
an anti-poverty program, mailing 500 letters to potential
participants, arranging for the Rev. Willie Wilson's Union Temple
Baptist Church in Southeast to serve as one forum, and reading some
self-help books, including Stephen R. Covey's "The 7 Habits of Highly
Effective People."
-- Qualifications. Barry said Watts-Brighthaupt is "educationally
qualified and has worked on similar projects," but details haven't yet
been made available. Moreover, in seeking to discredit the stalking
charges, Williams said Watts-Brighthaupt is psychologically
"unstable." Did that alleged trait not raise concern with Barry about
Watts-Brighthaupt's professional capabilities?
The matter also raises an intriguing question about what constitutes a
conflict of interest. District law makes it hard for public officials
to provide private financial gain for spouses, parents, siblings and
children, and their spouses. But it doesn't say anything about
girlfriends or boyfriends.
So the lesson appears to be that if you want to bend the rules, do it
for your mistress rather than your wife.
Worrisome Precedent
Metro has said the operator of the ill-fated rear train was not at
fault in the recent Red Line crash. Now we learn that earlier in the
month, a passenger's cellphone camera caught an operator looking into
his lap and sending text messages while underway. The operator got
only a one-week suspension. Metro should have done more to make an
example for its employees and the public.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2009/06/17/LI2009061701345.html
Kyle Schwitters
Like Adam Clayton Powell Was "Their" Hero ...
---------------
"For Barry, a Familiar Script Takes an Unfamiliar Twist"
By Nikita Stewart, Tim Craig and Dagny Salas
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, July 9, 2009
IT STARTED WITH an arrest, as it often does. There was a woman
involved, as there usually is. And there were the denials,
controversial behavior by the police and extraordinary news
conferences that feed a local media obsessed with Marion Barry. Within
his inner circle, there were the normal efforts to get Barry to back
off. As always, he largely ignored the advice.
The initial reaction from outside Barry's world was just as routine:
near silence from his fellow D.C. Council members and unwavering
support from his constituents, even though to much of Washington Barry
long ago ceased being a power player.
The drama could have ended yesterday evening when authorities
announced that they were dropping the stalking charges that again put
Barry's personal life on display. For his backers, this was evidence
that the former mayor is as much a victim of overzealous police as he
is a man who seems to court trouble. But there's the likelihood of an
investigation into his then-girlfriend getting a $60,000 council
contract from Barry (D-Ward 8), which means the sideshow spectacle
could continue.
At a 9 p.m. news conference, Natalie Williams, Barry's spokeswoman,
said Barry was "thankful" that the U.S. attorney's office decided not
to prosecute.
"The short answer is, this is over," she said later.
However, there were calls for an investigation into Barry's use of
public funds. His friends and supporters said they are worried about
the job given to Donna Watts-Brighthaupt, the woman who police say
accused Barry of following her, leading to his arrest Saturday.
Records indicate that the payments and cancellations of the contract
coincide with their makeups and breakups. So far, Watts-Brighthaupt
has been paid $15,000, and at Barry's request, the secretary of the
council has approved an additional payment of $5,000.
"Everybody's better off walking away from [the stalking charge], but
he has a raft of other challenges he has to deal with," said Frederick
D. Cooke Jr., Barry's attorney, referring to the contract.
Last night, council member David A. Catania (I-At Large) urged a probe
into the contracts, though it is unclear whether council members can
investigate a colleague.
"These are public funds," Catania said. "There needs to be an
accounting."
D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles said that he will investigate if
the council doesn't. "My strong preference would be to have the
council look into it," he said. "After all, it's money allocated to
the council. If the council chooses not to look into it, then I
certainly would."
Williams said last night that Barry will provide a fuller accounting
today of the work performed by Watts-Brighthaupt.
Barry's former campaign manager, Joe Louis Ruffin Jr., also questioned
yesterday why Watts-Brighthaupt was paid $500 in campaign funds a week
after receiving the city contract. "She didn't do any real work for
the campaign," Ruffin said.
Council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) said she was exasperated by
Barry's actions.
"We have too many urgent issues . . . to be continually distracted
this way," she said. "Someone needs to talk him, like an
intervention."
She said she continues to believe that Barry is an effective council
member.
According to U.S. Park Police, Barry, 73, was arrested and charged
after Watts-Brighthaupt, 40, flagged down an officer in Anacostia Park
and complained that Barry was "bothering" her. It was a murky
incident, further complicated when it was revealed that the two had
planned a trip to Rehoboth Beach, Del., but canceled and returned to
the District after an argument.
Barry was upset that their lovers' spat turned into an arrest. He
wanted to address the public in a news conference. Friends had to talk
him out of it, and in a compromise, Williams read his statements.
But Barry's insistence on publicly commenting on his relationship with
Watts-Brighthaupt has continued all week. After The Washington Post
published a story that revealed the contract for Watts-Brighthaupt to
develop "poverty reduction strategies," Barry called an 11 p.m. news
conference that news stations ran live even though Barry didn't
appear. Williams read a statement that called the contract "legal" and
Watts-Brighthaupt "unstable." The unusual event grew wilder when Watts-
Brighthaupt showed up and disrupted it.
In dropping charges yesterday, prosecutors said in a statement:
"Following a review of the evidence relating to stalking allegations
against Marion Barry and a careful analysis of the relevant factors,
including the elements of the offense and the strengths and weaknesses
of the evidence, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of
Columbia has decided not to pursue stalking charges in this matter."
But Andre Johnson, Barry's former spokesman, said he does not expect
Barry to let up. "He's so emphatic about getting his point across,"
Johnson said. "He's probably the greatest political and media
strategist I've ever met."
This time, however, Barry is up against Watts-Brighthaupt and her ex-
husband, Delonta Brighthaupt, who appear unwilling to let Barry have
the spotlight to himself.
Yesterday, Washington City Paper published voice mails between Barry
and Watts-Brighthaupt that detailed their sexual relationship and
continuous arguments. They were provided by Brighthaupt, according to
City Paper.
Barry fought back: "Any consensual, sexual relationship that Mr. Barry
and Ms. Watts had is a personal and private matter between two
adults," Williams said in a statement. "The content of these tapes
have absolutely nothing to do with the arrest of Mr. Barry on July 4th
and under no circumstances incriminates Mr. Barry of any crime.
Instead, the release of the tapes does nothing more than show the true
mindset and character of his accuser."
Behind the scenes, some council members were stepping up the pressure
on council Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D) to intervene with Barry,
although they remained hesitant to speak publicly.
"It's one thing not paying your taxes and having some goofy traffic
violation, but you start misusing public funds and that is a whole
different thing," one council member said.
Gray released a statement last night that did not address Barry's
situation but recounted the steps he's taken to tighten ethics
policies in recent years.
In February, a group of Ward 8 residents lobbied council members to
remove Barry from office and federal prosecutors asked a judge to send
the former mayor to jail for violating his probation after he failed
to file his taxes in a timely manner.
Many of them are young black professionals who have moved into Ward 8
in the past few years. They backed newcomer Charles Wilson, a 32-year-
old consultant, who was trounced in the Democratic primary in
September, in which Barry received 78 percent of the vote.
"It's disappointing news like this is always coming out, and it gives
off a negative perception of who we are," Wilson said.
"Marion Barry today reminds me of a marriage that started 20 years
ago," said Nikki Peele, 32, who moved to Congress Heights about two
years ago and muses daily on her blog, the Advoc8te. "He was charming.
He was wonderful. He brought you flowers every day. Many, many years
pass, and he doesn't bring you flowers anymore. . . . You keep holding
on because you remember when."
In Ward 8, most residents share an admiration for Barry, a civil
rights leader who later became a school board member, council member
and mayor. As leader of the nation's capital, he is credited with
helping to build the black middle class and reaching out to low-income
African Americans who felt disenfranchised. He built loyalty with the
Summer Youth Employment Program, which gave thousands of youths jobs
in difficult economic times. After his conviction on a 1990 charge for
cocaine possession, Barry spent six months in prison, only to stage a
comeback to the council and then be elected mayor again in 1994.
"Here, we are always going to love Marion Barry. He is Ward 8. He did
a lot of good work," said Barbara Barnes, 35, adding that he has "been
the best person to us."
"This bird done a lot for the city, got me my first summer job," said
Howard Greenfield, 56. "A lot of people don't know what he did in this
city. Nobody else was doing it."
Council member Yvette M. Alexander (D-Ward 7) predicted that Barry
will again emerge from controversy relatively unscathed politically.
She said she can't wait to see the movie "The Nine Lives of Marion
Barry," set to be shown next month on HBO.
"That describes it best," Alexander said. "The nine lives of Marion
Barry, except I think he has maybe 11 lives."
[Staff writers Keith L. Alexander, DeNeen L. Brown, Hamil R. Harris
and Robert McCartney contributed to this report.]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/08/AR2009070803347.html
Kyle Schwitters
By Colbert I. King
Saturday, July 11, 2009
I was heartened on Wednesday afternoon when an e-mail arrived from
D.C. Council Chairman Vincent Gray's communications director, Doxie
McCoy, advising me that the chairman would be issuing a statement of
council procedures in light of media requests for comment on council
member Marion Barry.
Earlier in the day, I had used my weekly WTOP radio commentary to call
upon the council and Barry to step up to the question of "who will be
made to pay for Barry's rip-off of D.C. taxpayers." I was referring to
The Post's story reporting that Barry gave his then-girlfriend, Donna
Watts-Brighthaupt, a $5,000-a-month city contract from his taxpayer-
funded office budget.
Some folks may have laughed their heads off about Barry "tree
boxing" (slang for checking on the girlfriend without stalking) Watts-
Brighthaupt while she was with her ex-husband. But getting over -- or
getting even -- with a love interest on the public's dime is no
laughing matter.
So I looked forward to what Gray might have to say about this sordid
affair.
Turns out, the statement he issued, "Gray Outlines Actions Underway to
Improve Council Procedures, Rules and Standards," amounted to next to
nothing as far as Barry is concerned. It may have been an attempt to
blind the public with fancy footwork. But Gray produced a slow-drag
without the music.
What's worse, there were a couple of lines in his statement that
should have jerked taxpayers out of their chairs, to wit: "Each
Council office is an independent entity that answers to the
constituents whom they serve," and, each council member's office is
accorded "autonomy" as "a designated independent personnel
authority."
"Each Council office is an independent entity"? Independent of what?
"Autonomy"? Who said so?
And what's with this "answers to the constituents whom they serve"
business?
The council wasn't created to serve "constituents."
The council is an elected body with authority delegated from Congress
to act as agents of the people of the District of Columbia. The
council is entrusted with powers to use public money on matters that
further the public interest, not the council member's own interest.
Council members are independent of nothing and totally dependent upon
the people who put them in office and pay for their upkeep.
"Independent personnel authority"? Independent, my foot! That's
exactly what allowed Marion Barry to get away with putting his then-
girlfriend on the public payroll, then taking her off after a spat,
then putting her back on after kissing and making up, then . . . aw,
forget it. It's something out of the Mystic Knights of the Sea Lodge
Hall.
Yesterday's announcement that the D.C. Council is engaging a private
law firm to conduct a wide-ranging probe of contracting procedures,
including a look at current contracts, is a positive step. But why
can't the Office of the D.C. Auditor or the Office of the Inspector
General perform that function?
The larger question is how the council's personnel system operates and
under what ground rules. Is there an effective code of conduct for
members?
For example, one city legislator has conducted his own intelligence
operation through the use of a part-time committee aide.
In this instance, that member asked the aide -- who is homeless -- to
stay at the Central Union Mission but told him to refuse to
participate in the religious service in order to see what happened.
That same aide was instructed to:
-- Use the hypothermia hotline and report the timing of the van
response.
-- Stay at the Community for Creative Non-Violence shelter and report
on how it is working.
-- Contact other homeless men who receive permanent supportive housing
and, without their knowledge, inform the council member of their
views.
The aide has serious medical issues and has broken housing rules
himself, so his name and that of the council member will not be
disclosed.
The council member's motive -- to learn about the treatment of the
city's homeless -- is commendable. The fact that he pays the informer
out of his own pocket is noteworthy, too.
But for a legislator to engage a homeless individual with serious
issues to surreptitiously gather information about city-supported
programs and institutions is, at best, a questionable practice.
But that's where "independent personnel authority" can lead.
Whether the new human resources management guide announced by Gray
will provide uniform hiring, pay and performance standards is open to
question. Especially since Gray says the guide preserves "the autonomy
accorded each council member's office."
The inclination to choose collegiality over accountability clouds the
effort. And that's the irritant.
Everything about the council should be transparent. It's not the case
now.
A veil of secrecy -- or at least vagueness -- shrouds the council's
hiring processes. Any D.C. citizen ought to be able to walk into a
council member's office and obtain a copy of the job description, list
of duties, and the qualifications of every employee or contractor
compensated with D.C. tax dollars. No one should be exempt.
Barry, his tearful apology to the council behind closed doors
notwithstanding, has gotten by for too long behaving as if he's
accountable only to himself. Council rules do nothing to disabuse him
or any other member of that fantasy. Hence, the abuse now on display.
Is Barry the only one?
John Fartlington Poopnagle
Long Overdue ...
------
"Call in the Prosecutors"
"Dubious earmarks add to the case for a criminal investigation of
Marion Barry"
Thursday, July 16, 2009
FIRST CAME the revelation that D.C. Council member Marion Barry (D-
Ward 8) put his girlfriend on the city payroll. Now come new -- and
even more troubling -- allegations that Mr. Barry steered nearly $1
million of public money to organizations that are questionable in
their origin and purpose. The D.C. Council's decision to authorize a
broad inquiry into these affairs is a good first step. But the
seriousness of the charges and the fact that the council's own lax
oversight is implicated demand separate investigations by the D.C.
inspector general and the U.S. attorney's office.
Less than a week after the disclosure that Mr. Barry directed $15,000
to a then-girlfriend, the Washington City Paper reported on Mr.
Barry's use of legislative earmarks to fund six nonprofit groups in
Ward 8 that apparently are controlled by his staff. Reporter Mike
DeBonis showed how Mr. Barry secured funding for the groups even
before they officially existed and detailed apparent irregularities,
including allegations of forgery and false statements, in how some
were constituted. Each received grants of $75,000 this year and are
set to get more money next year. It's unclear what the groups did for
the money.
The council last year established new rules limiting earmarks and
requiring recipients to submit extensive documentation and to undergo
audits. That the rules fall short seems clear from a taped account --
the person responsible says the recording was accidental -- of a March
meeting in which members of the council staff can be heard fretting
when confronted with Mr. Barry's unusual involvement in the operations
of the nonprofits. Says Council Budget Director Eric Goulet: "We've
moved beyond the ideal of how this should work. I'm glad this is not
on tape right now . . . but the council member should not be directly
making decisions about these grant agreements."
The events surrounding Mr. Barry illuminate concerns about how
expenditures near and dear to council members are policed. Separate
from funds that are earmarked as part of the legislative process, the
council has an operating budget of some $20 million. It appears -- as
witnessed by Mr. Barry's shameless boast that he broke no rules in
hiring a girlfriend and would do so again -- that members are given
wide latitude to do what they want.
Accordingly, it was encouraging that D.C. Council Chairman Vincent C.
Gray (D) agreed to expand the scope of the investigation by noted
lawyer Robert S. Bennett to cover the council's use of personal
services contracts and earmarks and whether there is a need to toughen
council rules. However, more than ethical issues are in play; that's
why authorities empowered to conduct criminal investigations must also
take a look at Mr. Barry's actions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/15/AR2009071503379.html