Don't You Love A Farce?

Ward 8 Councilmember Trayon White Sr., who was recently indicted and arraigned on a federal felony charge that includes a claim that he accepted a $20,000 bribe in 2020 from the head of a nonprofit organization that had held a government contract, may have been in effect removed as chair of the Committee on Recreation, Libraries and Youth Affairs with its reorganization; and an outside law firm — Latham & Watkins LLP — may have been hired by the council to perform an independent investigation separate from that conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia with a price tag of up to $400,000. However, White retains not only his vote on matters before the full council but also his membership on other critical committees, creating a potential conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Consider that White remains on the Committee on Executive Administration and Labor. Its members provide oversight of policies and practices of several entities that are currently investigating him or have in the recent past investigated him. 

For example, the committee oversees the DC Office of the City Administrator and the Executive Office of the Mayor. After White’s arrest, Mayor Muriel Bowser ordered a full review of violence interruption contracts, including those linked to the entity whose owner allegedly provided the bribe to White in 2020 and offered additional bribes between June and August of this year.

For the latter, White allegedly “corruptly agreed to accept $156,000 in cash payments in exchange for using his position as a D.C. Councilmember to pressure government employees at Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement (ONSE) and [Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services] to extend several D.C. contracts,” according to prosecutors. Between June 26 and Aug. 18 — the time of his arrest — he had pocketed at much as $35,000, most of it delivered to him while he sat in a parked car outside a luxury high-rise apartment building in Ward 6 where he was reportedly living, according to documents prepared by federal officials, including FBI Special Agent Matthew Gano.

Last week, the councilmember entered a not guilty plea through his attorney. The criminal case will wind its way through the U.S. District Court for the next several months.

I have made no secret that I believe White should be expelled without delay from the legislature given comments he reportedly made during exchanges with the briber, captured on tape by the FBI — which suggest vulnerable residents may be in jeopardy if he is allowed to roam freely in the halls of the John A. Wilson Building and to communicate with government agency managers or employees without pre-established parameters and witnesses.

Unfortunately, no such boundaries apparently exist. Is another bribe being made that we have yet to learn about? Who knows. 

As a member of the executive administration committee, White could vote on actions affecting the DC Office of Campaign Finance. OCF has cited the councilmember for violating rules and regulations related to the Fair Elections Act; he still owes the city $58,906.29. Those were public funds he received for his 2022 mayoral campaign. 

OCF ordered him to repay the city. He hasn’t. Nevertheless, he will be allowed to vote on matters involving that agency.

Further, White also has a role in overseeing the Board of Ethics and Government Accountability. Interestingly, BEGA opened its own investigation of White last week, according to staff director Ashley Cooks.

“The Board opened a formal investigation [to] determine whether Councilmember Trayon White violated the Financial Conflicts of Interest statute D.C. Official Code § 1–1162.23, Council Code of Conduct Rule III.(a) – Gifts from Outside Sources (the prohibition on accepting gifts from prohibited sources) or Council Code of Conduct Rule VI.(b) Use of Government Resources (Prestige of Office),” Cooks wrote in an email, replying to my written inquiry about any action it has taken.

“However, the Board has decided to stay our investigation, pending the Council member’s pending bribery case in District court,” Cooks wrote.

Learning all of this, I kept singing to myself “send in the clowns … there ought to be clowns,” meaning no disrespect, of course, to Stephen Sondheim’s lovely and unrelated song. 

The council’s entire approach to this Trayon White government corruption case feels like opening day at the circus.

On Tuesday, the ad hoc committee — established by Council Chair Phil Mendelson and consisting of every member of the legislature, except White — held its first meeting. The group has been formed to investigate his actions, parsing any violations of various District ethics laws and council rules — much as BEGA would do. Its timeline doesn’t mandate a report until mid-December, meaning the committee’s decision about whether to expel, censure or reprimand White appears to be several months away.

The ad hoc committee is being led by Council Chair Pro Tempore Kenyan McDuffie. As members munched on eggs, sausages and other breakfast food, he said in an opening statement that the legislature’s investigation is a “serious matter and requires a serious response, not one that is politically expedient or looks best in the newspaper.” Except that the setting seemed to belie his assertion.

After his statement, McDuffie expelled the press and some council staffers from the meeting, citing sections of the District’s open meetings law that permit government entities to deliberate behind closed doors under the guise of protecting individuals and preventing harm. That seems to extend cover to White while denying residents the right to know fully the scope of the investigation McDuffie is expected to lead. 

I was incredulous and objected. 

Before turning off the Zoom and closing and locking council conference room doors to exclude the public and the press, McDuffie failed to provide critical information: He did not share the names of the lawyers who would be questioning potential witnesses and reviewing documents. He did not explain how the firm had come to receive a $400,000 sole-source contract. He did not provide a copy of that contract in order to share the scope of work to be performed by Latham & Watkins. He did not identify who, if anyone, within the council would directly supervise or sign off on its activities. 

When I asked for a copy of the contract, I was told it would take the secretary seven days to upload it to the council’s electronic filing system.

What?!

An allegedly corrupt politician should not be perceived as needing or meriting protection from public exposure. White’s actions — past and present — have injured District residents. Their hard-earned money has already been misused by a nonprofit government contractor to bribe White, per the indictment. Their money has already been misspent by White during an election. And their money is being misspent continuing to pay White an annual salary of more than $167,000.

The council has a responsibility to present — in clear, unambiguous detail — exactly how this independent investigation will proceed. It must state the breadth of its scope. It must make available copies of the contractual agreement with Latham & Watkins.

The council should also move swiftly to assure residents that all roads leading to the public trough will be denied White, who apparently has a penchant for accepting bribes. That means curbing his direct engagement with government employees, including council staffers other than his own.

Truth be told, I have little confidence that McDuffie can be expected to even consider these issues. After all, on Tuesday he deliberately and repeatedly avoided members of the press who patiently waited for a statement before and immediately after the ad hoc committee meeting. 

More troubling, perhaps, was the fact that McDuffie refused to support the reorganization of council committees proposed by Mendelson that was triggered by White’s arrest on bribery charges and violations of District law. McDuffie voted “present” on the resolution, which also formalized authority for the investigation that he heads.

The only other person to vote “present” was White.

Last week, I asked with whom McDuffie’s allegiance resides. Was his vote this week the answer to that question?