Sabotaging Open Government

Supporters of secretive city government decision-making get a boost from a cabal on the D.C. Council.

DISTRICT residents eager for the right to witness the workings of their government were dealt a low blow this week by D.C. Council members Phil Mendelson

(D-At Large), Carol Schwartz (R-At Large) and, perhaps inadvertently, Jim Graham (D-Ward 1).

For the second week in a row, the three council members prevented Government Operations Committee Chairman Vincent B. Orange Sr. (D-Ward 5) from gathering a quorum to hold a public meeting on legislation that would ban D.C. government bodies from conducting meetings closed to citizens.

The three committee members had ample notice of the meeting. Mr. Orange even placed calls to their offices. But while Mr. Orange and committee member Adrian M. Fenty (D-Ward 4) waited for them to show up, the three huddled behind a closed door a few feet away in Mr. Graham's office, preventing a quorum as they plotted against the bill. It was a disgusting and cowardly performance on the part of Mr. Mendelson and Mrs. Schwartz.

Because the committee was stifled, the city's public access law, which effectively protects city officials from scrutiny, criticism and embarrassment, remains on the books. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, with great accuracy, describes the city's law as "the most outdated, ineffective open meetings statute in the country."

Yet there may be some hope for transparency and accountability in the D.C. government. Mr. Graham informed us yesterday that he does not oppose the bill. He explained that he had arrived late at his office on Thursday. "I found Phil [Mendelson] waiting in my office for me, and Carol [Schwartz] arrived minutes later. Both requested to meet with me."

Mr. Graham said, "I indicated to them that I would not vote for their idea to move to table the bill outright. I indicated that there are several amendments that I wanted to use as vehicles for discussion and others that I wanted to move." Mr. Graham stressed that he will not move an amendment that he had prepared that one council member said "guts the bill." "It was drafted by staff, and I was going to use it for discussion of the issues. The bill does need some work," Mr. Graham said, "but I have every intention of supporting it in the committee and in the council."

If Mr. Graham follows through, Mr. Orange will have his quorum and the hope of victory for openness in the D.C. government will remain alive. The chairman should schedule another meeting.