Councilmember Evans Represents the 1%, Not the Occupiers in His Ward

Peter Tucker of The Fightback Blog interviews Jack Evans: Councilmember Evans Represents the 1%, Not the Occupiers in His Ward.

Advertisements

The FightBack.org – Jack Evans In Violation of D.C. Law?

Excerpt:

Today, along with voting to close a $188 million budget shortfall, the D.C. Council is scheduled to vote on a $46 million tax abatement for a proposed luxury boutique hotel in Adams Morgan to be operated by Marriott. Ward 2 Councilmember Jack Evans, who earns a second six-figure salary from the law and lobbying firm Patton Boggs, recused himself from voting on the last deal involving taxpayer subsidies for a project involving Marriott, possibly because his firm represented Marriott (details below). It will be interesting to see whether Mr. Evans recuses himself today as well. (Update: Mr. Evans did not recuse himself and the measure passed by a 9-3 margin, with one abstention (Muriel Bowser). Councilmembers David Catania, Phil Mendelson and Mary Cheh opposed the tax abatement.)

See The FightBack.org – Jack Evans In Violation of D.C. Law?

Chairman Gray FOIA Request

July 19, 2010

Vincent C. Gray, Chairman
Council of the District of Columbia
John A. Wilson Building
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Suite 504
Washington, DC 20004

D.C. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST

Dear Chairman Gray:

Pursuant to the provisions of the District of Columbia Freedom of Information Act, I request that you provide me with a copy of a statement of an appearance of conflict of interest and recusal by Councilmember Jack Evans pertaining to the $272 million public financing package for the Marriott International convention center hotel. This statement should have been filed sometime in late June or early July 2009, as required by the D.C. Municipal Regulations regarding potential conflicts of interest by councilmembers and other D.C. public officials (Title 3, Chapter 33, “Elections and Ethics Conflict of  Interest and Use of Government Resources for Campaign-Related Purposes,” Rule 3300, 3301, 3302, 3303, 3304, 3305).

I say, “should have been filed” because last July 1, 2009, The Examiner newspaper reported that Mr. Evans recused himself the day before from the final vote on the public subsidy for the convention center hotel “because his law firm, Patton Boggs, represents Marriott.” LINK TO EXAMINER  ARTICLE: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/D_C_-tentatively-OKs-paying-_72M-more-to-finance-convention-center-hotel-7903531-49548487.html

Just a few days earlier, on June 26, 2009, Evans, as chairman of the Committee and Finance and Revenue. had submitted a report to all council members on Bill 18-310, the “New Convention Center Hotel Amendment Act of 2009.” In that report, Evans, who had been actively involved in every step of bringing this bill to a final vote and had theretofore mentioned nothing about any possible conflict, said he was recusing himself  “from the consideration of this measure in order to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.” He offered no further explanation of his late-stage recusal in his committee report to council members, nor did he explain how this appearance of a conflict had only developed at the last moment. Continue reading