Wilson Building Bulletin: Protest restrictions, (over)riding for Circulator drivers, psychiatric facility oversight

Welcome back to another busy week of local legislating in the capital of our democracy, where the right to free speech is celebrated, championed, and uplifted — so long as that speech is happening at a reasonable volume, and not at an hour when people are sleeping. 

New protest rules

In Tuesday’s legislative meeting, the council voted 9-2 on a piece of emergency legislation restricting how protesters can assemble in a residential area — a move widely decried by local activist groups, some of whom gathered outside the Wilson Building with megaphones and cardboard headstones mourning the First Amendment as the vote passed.

Protesting outside of a powerful politicos home is nothing new in the District (as some councilmembers know intimately) but over the past year, the city has seen a consistent drumbeat (literally) of pro-Palestine demonstrations in residential Northwest neighborhoods, home to both the Israeli embassy and federal officials, like State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller. There’s also been a routine, loud demonstration outside the home of the Chinese Ambassador in Kalorama for the past several months. 

The legislation, introduced by Ward 2 Councilmember Brooke Pinto (whose constituents’ homes may be most likely to be impacted by this sort of thing), prohibits demonstrators from using amplified sound devices in a residential zone from the hours of 7 p.m. to 9 a.m. It also bans the throwing of projectiles at someone’s home with the intent to intimidate. (You might ask, isn’t that already illegal? And to that we’d say, never put it past a legislator to ban something that’s already banned! D.C.’s code prohibits throwing “stones or missiles”, and it is also, quite obviously, already illegal to destroy private property.) 

What passed on Tuesday was a pared-down version of Pinto’s original proposal — which sought to ban any protests, regardless of their raucousness, at a residence between 7 p.m. and 9 a.m.

The bill comes as an amendment to another law already on the books; under the Residential Tranquility Act of 2010, it’s illegal to protest at a residence between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. It’s also illegal, under that law, to wear a mask while demonstrating at a residence, or to gather — meaning congregate in a group of three or more — without notifying the D.C. police of the protest time and location. (Violating the 2010 law is a misdemeanor, punishable by 90 days in jail or a fine up to $500.) 

Because it was introduced on an emergency basis, the bill did not get a public hearing (which is when residents can weigh in on matters of local governing) and it only received one “reading,” or vote from the councilmembers. (Unlike permanent legislation, which is voted on twice, emergency legislation can pass with a supermajority –nine votes– upon first reading.) 

Ward 8’s Trayon White, participating remotely, voted no, as did Ward 5’s Zachary Parker. Parker, for his part, said he was sympathetic to residents’ concerns but took issue with the legislation passing on such a rushed basis. 

“Even if this law yields no arrest, it has the potential to meaningfully change the relationship between protesters and law enforcement,” Parker said during the council hearing. “We should hold ourselves to a higher standard when such important interests are at stake.” 

Trayon White echoed a similar point, noting he agreed with “some,” of what the bill sought to do but not the manner in which it was done. 

“The point of demonstrations is to bring attention, as we know, to those who may not feel like they have a voice,” White said. “This bill has not been subjected to a public hearing or a roundtable, yet we're voting on this on an emergency basis without public input.” 

In a letter to the council, Bowser lent her support to the bill, framing it as “a necessary response to the alarming rise in targeted demonstrations that intentionally disrupt the peace and wellbeing of our residential neighborhoods.” 

Ward 3 Councilmember Matthew Frumin spoke up in favor of the bill, too. “The idea that protest can be regulated in this context is not controversial…we’ve passed a law on this,” Frumin said, referencing the 2010 law. “Go ahead and protest at other times, but please don’t intimidate families. Don’t intimidate children as they’re getting to school. I would have liked to see the bill passed as it was originally formulated, but if this is what can be done, then this is what can be done.”

Prior to Tuesday’s hearing, the bill received significant pushback from organizers, community activists, and the D.C. National Lawyers Guild. In a statement, Harriet’s Wildest Dreams called the legislation unnecessary considering the existing laws on the books around residential protests, and noted that by passing the bill on an emergency status, the council would be fast-tracking legislation containing a criminal penalty without giving residents a chance to weigh in. 

(Over)riding for Circulator drivers

You may remember that earlier this fall, the council passed emergency legislation funneling the sale of Circulator assets to drivers out of work after the service’s untimely demise.

Introduced by Allen, the bill would use the money for severance, wages, bonus pay, and workforce development for laid-off Circulator workers. Well … Bowser vetoed that bill, and the council voted to override her veto on Tuesday. 

“To hail these workers as essential workers during the pandemic, to only now abandon them ... I think is inconsistent with District values and with our own statements regarding the value of their service,” Allen said during the meeting. 

Bowser argued the bill would create a “new standard for contractor jobs that are eliminated as a result of Council-enacted budget reductions.” Circulator drivers are technically contracted by the city, but Allen maintained that the bill wouldn’t actually be applicable to any city contractor, nor would it change any city-wide contracting standards; he also noted that calling the service cuts “council-enacted” was misleading, given it was Bowser’s budget cuts that eliminated the Circulator. (Allen previously told The 51st that councilmembers had tried to move money to extend Circulator service by another year during this past spring’s budget season, but they ultimately returned a budget to Bowser that kept the cuts in.)

Ward 5 Councilmember Zachary Parker asked Chairman Phil Mendelson why, in his opinion, Bowser vetoed the bill. Mendo had some thoughts, or as he put it “speculations.” 

“Ever since we approved the budget, the mayor has been very critical of the council for, in her words, being fiscally irresponsible,” Mendelson said. “I see this as just another shot at us…I think this is just a continuation of finding any way to criticize us for being fiscally irresponsible.”

The heads of local government are fighting – and in this case, the people who stand to lose the most are laid-off Circulator drivers, many of whom originally believed they’d have until spring 2025 before their routes were axed. 

Oversight of psychiatric clinics 

On Monday, the council’s health committee examined operations at D.C.’s only for-profit psychiatric hospital, the Psychiatric Institute of Washington, after a watchdog report in July uncovered complaints of abuse and neglect. 

The report, published by Disability Rights DC, stated that many patients at PIW feel unsafe, and that their stays left them “traumatized and distrustful of the mental health system that landed them at PIW.” Through FOIA requests, records reviews, and complaints from sources, the report laid out several instances of alleged assault and sexual assault, issues with staffing, and the overuse of seclusion and restraint, among other problems. The report claimed that PIW and the D.C. agencies meant to oversee it – the Department of Behavioral Health and D.C. Health – have not responded adequately to the conditions at the facility. 

“The status quo cannot continue,” reads the report. “DBH and DC Health must provide increased and meaningful oversight of PIW.” 

During Monday’s hearing, led by Health Committee chair At-large Councilmember Christina Henderson, one PIW nurse testified that conditions are even worse than what’s included in the July report; assaults happen nearly every day, the nurse said, and staffing levels are so low they sometimes leave one or two staffers to care for 18-21 patients. 

DBH Director Barbara Bazron said the department is upping its oversight visits to twice monthly starting in October, and increasing the frequency of case reviews for patients. She also said the department has been proactively reaching out to PIW for incident reports. 

Erich Amoh, the chief executive of PIW, was not present at the hearing. During her questioning of government officials, Henderson lamented his absence, noting there were questions she’d hoped he could answer. In a statement to the Post earlier this week, Amoh defended the hospital, maintaining that incidents are thoroughly reported according to protocol. 

Lawmakers also discussed the hole in psychiatric care for children, particularly inpatient beds. Currently, only PIW and Children’s National Hospital have available beds for children, even as city leaders and health providers observe an increase in the severity of mental health problems among young people since the pandemic. The new hospital opening at the old United Medical Center campus doesn’t include beds for children’s psychiatric care, and it’s not clear whether it’s too late to rework youth psychiatric care into the hospital’s contract. Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services Wayne Turnage had doubts it would be possible to reconfigure plans now. 

Bazron, while noting the existing service gaps for children at the hearing, touted in-school counseling programs and DBH’s efforts to reach kids where they are. She said both are moves that should reduce the strain on inpatient or intensive outpatient care programs.