On Tuesday, November 10, there will be a special election to fill a vacant Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC) spot in ANC6B. Three candidates are running for this open position in 6B03, previously held by Julie Olsen: Caitlin Fennessy; Norman Metzger; and Randy Steer. With a number of important development issues about to affect the ANC 6B neighborhood, such as the proposed renovation of the CSX tunnel under Virginia Avenue, I see this election as being an important chance to ensure that neighborhood voices are heard as some major development projects evolve.
All three candidates have set up websites with information on their backgrounds and where they stand on various issues, links to which are provided below. After reviewing their websites, I contacted each candidate with a few additional questions, and have included their answers below.
If you have additional questions for the candidates, CHAMPS has organized a forum on Monday, November 9, at 7 pm, at the Capitol Hill Arts Workshop (corner of 7th and G SE). (Update: The forum on Monday night has been canceled) All three have been responsive to my emails and are eager to meet and chat with their neighbors. So if you cannot make it out on Monday night, please contact them directly.
Voting will take place during the November 10 ANC meeting at 7 pm at the old Naval Hospital located at 921 Pennsylvania Avenue SE. Residents of ANC 6B03 can cast their votes from 7:15 – 8:15 pm, and the results will be announced at the end of the meeting. The full meeting agenda, can be found on the ANC6B Web site. To determine if you are in 6B03, check this map for the street boundaries. And remember to bring a photo ID or your voter registration card in order to your vote.
Follow me after the jump for the questions I asked each of the candidates, and their responses.
- What motivated you to run for the ANC 6B position?
- What sets you apart from the other candidates?
- Why should people vote for you?
- What is your favorite thing about the neighborhood? What is the one thing you would change?
Caitlin Fennessy – website: http://fennessyanc.com/
1) What motivated you to run for the ANC 6B position?
I want to serve on the ANC to help keep this neighborhood a place where we all can enjoy living. My husband and I were thrilled to buy our first home in the heart of this vibrant community. Our neighborhood is unique for its historic charm, communal parks, and proximity to first-rate restaurants and shops. We hope to live in this neighborhood for a long time and one day raise a family here. I want to ensure that it remains the wonderful place to live that it is today. It is important that our community’s views are considered in currently planned and future development work, such as the CSX tunnel expansion, Eastern Market Metro Plaza design, and Hine property redevelopment. These projects will impact us greatly both during construction and after their completion. I want to be your next ANC representative to ensure that we all have a voice in these processes.
2) What sets you apart from the other candidates?
I would bring a unique perspective to the ANC due to my youth, innovative approach, and support for local businesses. I feel that I would be able to encourage greater involvement among our communities’ newer members and young families, while still representing the viewpoints of our community’s established residents. I have always been adept at working with people of greatly varying backgrounds and viewpoints. Throughout my academic and professional career, I have always volunteered in my community. I have coordinated community events, tutored high school students, taught English as second language, and helped a new refugee family acclimate to the Washington area. These activities have taught me how to listen carefully and how to approach problems in innovative ways. I think these skills will help me find solutions to important and contentious community concerns. Finally, as the daughter of small-business owners, I believe that we must be supportive of our neighborhood’s local businesses. The first-class restaurants and shops on 8th street are an asset to our community. If chosen as your representative, I would be attentive to the concerns of small businesses, along with the needs of neighbors who live near by.
3) Why should people vote for you?
I am ready and willing to work hard to ensure that our neighbors’ views are heard. Many of my neighbors have seen me working in front of our house to terrace our front yard by building a brick wall. It has been a difficult and at times frustrating project. But, thanks to the advice of numerous neighbors, many donated old bricks, and a lot of hard work, it is coming together. I hope that my efforts have demonstrated that I am not afraid of a difficult task and am willing to put in the long hours and hard work necessary to succeed. I have no illusions that representing the views of a diverse group of neighbors is easy. But, I am willing to listen and work to ensure that our community’s views are considered by the larger ANC, city officials, and local developers.
4) What is your favorite thing about the neighborhood? What is the one thing you would change?
My favorite aspect of the neighborhood is its small-town feel. Our neighborhood offers welcomed tranquility in the heart of a bustling city. Its historic charm is unsurpassed in Washington. But overall, I think it is the sense of community that I enjoy most. I love that our neighbors know each other well and stop to chat so frequently.
The one thing I would change is the unfortunate impact that construction frequently has on our neighborhood. I am extremely grateful for the work that WASA has coordinated in replacing the lead water pipes that run under our neighborhood’s streets. However, I do not believe that construction’s impact on parking and on the condition of our streets and sidewalks needs to last for as long as it does. If chosen as your ANC representative, I would encourage city officials and future developers to adopt plans that include restoring blocks to their original condition before moving on to the next area for construction.
Norman Metzger – website: http://www.metzgerch.org/
1) What motivated you to run for the ANC 6B position?
Issues that I felt strongly about (e.g. the Bar” problem on Barracks Row) coupled to the belief that if you want to get something done, then do it.
2) What sets you apart from the other candidates?
Past accomplishments on behalf of the community; e.g. major role in founding Capitol Hill Village and dealing with particular problems, such as working with neighbors to stop the conversion of The Peoples Church into a nightclub. Also, pursued city-wide issues. In 2007, I launched a campaign, including testimony before the DC Council and a website, to require sidewalk walk-throughs at construction sites. Now a city-wide requirement. These efforts and others have given me a wide-ranging understanding of city government and knowledge of city officials.
3) Why should people vote for you?
My successful record in addressing community problems and issues.
4) What is your favorite thing about the neighborhood? What is the one thing you would change?
That it is a terrific and mutually supportive community. I would deal with poor traffic management – badly-time traffic lights, the sometimes perilous crossing of Pennsylvania Avenue, better coordination of road and sidewalk work so we don’t have moveable and Olympic scale obstacle courses on our streets and sidewalks.
Randy Steer – website: http://www.randysteerforanc.org/
1) What motivated you to run for the ANC 6B position?
I was active in my old neighborhood (Adams Morgan) for most of the 14 years I was there — on the boards of several community associations and the Community Development Corporation, but my experience with the acrimonious and often downright nasty ANC there turned off ANCs for about 20 years. I haven’t been as active on the Hill as I had intended, so the ANC vacancy provides an opportunity to get back into community involvement. (I was happy with Julie Olson’s 7 years of service in the ANC so I never felt a reason to run against her during those years.)
2) What sets you apart from the other candidates?
I believe I represent the best balance of experience and moderate, progressive positions on issues among the three candidates. I have substantial experience with community organizations, and a fairly long experience living in the neighborhood. I’ve lived on the Hill — in the ANC 6B03 district — for 11 years, and in DC for 25 years. I’m a “dog-friendly candidate”. Most importantly, I believe that home-owners’ rights and the interests of all residents should take primacy in developing all local policies.
3) Why should people vote for you?
I’m impartial, analytic, and common-sense. Where there’s development on Capitol Hill, I want it to be sensible, sustainable, “green” when possible, and I want to ensure that the interests of current residents are put first, ahead of developer interests and city interests like maximizing the tax base. I will use the ANC’s zoning and liquor license reviews to help ensure that new businesses serve the neighborhood. On traffic and parking, I will ensure that the convenience of residents takes precedence over the convenience of visitors.
Currently the city’s building and zoning officials are more lenient with businesses than with residents trying to improve their own homes — I want to see that reversed, or at least see that residents get comparable breaks. I specifically want to ensure that regulations don’t get in the way of residents trying to make their homes more energy-efficient or sustainable, or who want to install solar energy systems.
4) What is your favorite thing about the neighborhood? What is the one thing you would change?
Picking a single favorite thing is tough, but two of my favorites are the neighborhood’s walkability (especially given the increasing choices of good restaurants that we can walk to) and its dog-friendliness. Both are characteristics that I think we can enhance even further. The one thing I would like to change would be to shift the notion of historic preservation away from nit-picking on building materials and how many panels a door or window has, and towards a broader concept of preserving long-standing characteristics of the neighborhood.
What exactly is “the ‘bar’ problem on Barracks Row?”
The only places that can survive without liquor licenses are fast food joints and coffee houses.
Hill restaurants have to attract business from outside of 20003 to get the variety that the neighborhood would like.
Saying “no” is not a solution.
I’ll leave it to Norm to define what he means by “bar problem” — I don’t see it as quite as significant as he does.
But we do want to be a bit selective when we can. I lived in Adams Morgan for 14 years — it was fun, but I agree with most residents in our neighborhood that we don’t want Eastern Market/Barracks Row to turn into another Adams Morgan. The biggest distinction is that Adams Morgan has become dependent upon being a “destination” for visitors from outside the area, while even good restaurants in our neighborhood have been able to depend more on the nearby community as their core customer base. They get their share of customers from other neighborhoods too, but transforming Barracks Row into a “destination” strip of 3-am bars and nightclubs will not provide any major benefit to residents.
I agree that saying “no” to all liquor licenses is not the answer, but I believe the correct response is to generally only support “CR” (restaurant) liquor licenses rather than “CT” (tavern/bar) licenses, unless the presence of a bar in a particular location offers some other benefit to the neighborhood. (For instance, I’d probably be willing to support a CT bar license in a location at the bottom of 8th St. near I St., because it could help draw customers further down Barracks Row and thus would help stimulate investment in the rest of that block.)
The ANC alcohol subcommittee just had a meeting last night in which an applicant who had switched his liquor license request from “restaurant” to “bar” announced that he was switching it back to “restaurant” as a result of neighborhood feedback. I think I may have had some impact on that decision when I talked to the applicant’s prospective landlord and explained that it was in the landlord’s interest to have neighborhood support, rather than opposition, to the project.
With that change of category back to “CR”, I think there will be an immediate flip of neighborhood sentiment back in favor of the project, and I anticipate that it will be well received by neighbors as customers. Thus we will add to our dining choices without the risk that in the future the establishment could switch its operations to an all-evening-happy-hour drink-till-you-drop bar, which the CT license would have allowed.
Um…maybe a candidate shouldn’t be commenting on a blog devoted to discuss the candidates…
Just a thought. And, if he can’t resist, maybe he should keep his response to a minimum…Just another thought.
Everyone is free to comment on The Hill is Home! It is for and by the community.
I would actually encourage the candidates to respond, especially if a reader poses a question in their comment. Since there was no forum for all the candidates to come together, this is a good place to allow for more questions to be asked, and to get a good discussion going. So, by all means, let the candidates know your thoughts and let them have a chance to share their views!
I think Claudia has an excellent point–but it is only credible if the other candidates have been notified of this discussion. Unless and until that happens, Kathleen’s concerns are warranted.
I let them all know about the when the post would go up last week and just sent a follow up email to ensure all of them know that they are welcome to comment. I thought I indicated to them that they were welcome to comment last week, but to be sure I just sent them all a not about it. Thanks for suggesting I do that!
The “bar” problem is too many of them. I favor supporting requests for restaurant licenses not tavern licenses coupled when needed to a Voluntary Agreement; and indeed the newest applicant (“Chesapeake” at 8th and E) last week switched it’s request from a tavern to a restaurant license. Progress. Let’s not forget that this is a residential community, and many residents are likely not amused by patrons spilling out of bars at 3 am with the collateral side effects. We don’t need a second Adams Morgan.
Mr. Metzger:
Can you provide us with a list of all of the establishments on 8th Street SE with Tavern licenses, as opposed to restaurant licenses? I can only think of a small handful of places with Tavern licenses, and of those that I’m aware of, several often close well before they’re required to by law b/c of lack of customers, particularly on weeknights.
Ms Remmert,
I don’t have the list and not even sure it’s relevant. The point is to be sure that not only the current owner but also future owners of the same place are operating under a restaurant license. Even a restaurant license, as Randy Steer has noted and as described on the ABRA web site, is fairly liberal about hours.
Mr. Metzger –
Thank you for your response. I believe that you, by asserting that there is a “bar problem” on 8th Street, have made it relevant. My perception is that we have many new and wonderful restaurants on 8th street, which is a trend I’d like to see continue. You’ve asserted that we have “a bar problem” and that there are “too many of them.” I would like to know what establishments have tavern licenses, since you have asserted that there are too many. I’m just trying to clarify your remarks. You’ve said that there are too many, and since you’ve brought it up as part of your platform, I believe that this is very relevant.
The ABRA database as of late October shows the following “Tavern” licenses on 8th St. (“V/A” after the name indicates that there’s a “Voluntary Agreement” that places additional restrictions on the establishment’s operations.)
– Old Siam (V/A)
– Phase I (V/A)
– Lola’s (V/A)
– Jordan’s 8
– Cava (V/A)
There are more on Pennsylvania Ave:
– 18th Amendment (V/A)
– Trusty’s Bar (V/A)
– Capitol Lounge (V/A)
– Tune Inn
– Li’l Pub (V/A)
– Pour House (V/A)
– Hawk and Dove (V/A)
– Remington’s (V/A) (actually a Nightclub license, which is even less restricted than a Tavern license)
Each potential investor, whatever the amount of food they intend to serve, will have a different business model, and certainly be in a unique building and location. A one-size-fits-all insistence on CR licenses handicaps owners in a difficult economic environment that requires creativity and flexibility.
This should not be an adverserial process that discourages investment in the community.
Both Mr. Speer and Mr. Metzger ignore the potential of using well-tailored voluntary agreements, crafted in cooperation with neighbors, to ensure that an establishment suits its environment.
A good example is SOVA on H Street. Although it is a coffeehouse, it has a CT (tavern) license, allowing it to present its popular bluegrass music programs in the upstairs bar in the evenings. The excellent food offerings during the day would likely never fulfill the requirements for a CR license and that would be a major loss for its many loyal patrons.
I think that a CR license, with its admittedly modest strictures in combination with a voluntary agreement, is a sensible approach to reconciling commercial interests with the fact of a residential neighborhood. It may be that the ABRA specifications for different licenses may need to be addressed to improve the regulatory process, not least reducing the need for voluntary agreements, themselves an imperfect tool.
Barracks Row, Pennsylvania Avenue, and Eastern Market are commercial, not residential. They are zoned commercial, and some properties that abut them have commercial zoning or “grandfathered” use as commercial.
They have been used this way long before anyone alive today bought properties near them.
An overly restrictive attitude toward business development will deter investment. The only thing that will be left is banks, cellphone stores, fast food, and chains. Or restaurants that can’t survive.