Whether Washington, D.C. voters will have the chance to elect an attorney general this year remains a hot topic on the D.C. Council floor. Currently, the attorney general is appointed by the mayor. In 2010, voters approved a charter amendment authorizing the first election of the city’s attorney general and setting a primary election for April of this year.

In late 2013, the council passed a law delaying the election from 2014 to 2018, fearing the city lacked the necessary preparation. Paul Zukerberg, the only candidate for the city’s first attorney general race, challenged the 2013 law in the District of Columbia Superior Court. Judge Laura Cordero denied Zukerberg’s motion for a preliminary injunction, stating that he would not suffer irreparable harm from the delay and therefore did not meet the standard to grant the injunction.

Upon the judge’s ruling, the council acted quickly to introduce a bill scheduling an election for attorney general in November 2014. The bill has sparked heated debate, both on the floor of the council and with current Attorney General Irvin Nathan. Nathan criticized the bill, stating it does not comport with the city charter. The bill would put the attorney general office on the November ballot without allowing for a primary election, thus circumventing the requirement of an election on a partisan basis as required by the 2010 charter amendment.

If the new bill passes the council, the possibility of a mayoral veto is likely, based on Nathan’s opposition to the measure. However, Council Chairman Phil Mendelson still plans to move the bill to passage, likely bringing it to a final vote in the next month.

Phil Mendelson, the chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, introduced a bill that would bar people who made political contributions from obtaining contracts or doing other business with the city.

Mendelson said the motivation behind his bill was to end the perception of pay-to-play in Washington, D.C.

The living wage bill officially passed through the D.C. City Council today, and is now on its way to Mayor Gray for signature. Mayor Gray has promised to sign the bill this time, a measure he initially rejected earlier this year.

The bill will raise the minimum wage to $9.50 in July 2014, $10.50 the following year, and $11.50 by 2016.

The bill also provides for future increases tied to the Consumer Price Index.

Photo of the John A. Wilson Building by Andrew Wiseman in Wikimedia Commons.

The Washington, D.C. City Council unanimously approved a bill raising the city’s minimum wage to $11.50 per hour.

The Council must hold a final vote on the bill and send it to Mayor Vincent C. Gray before it becomes law. The final vote will probably occur early next year.

If the measure passes, the new minimum wage will take effect in 2016, making it one of the highest minimum wages in the country.

The City Council in Washington, D.C. has unanimously approved a campaign finance reform bill. The new legislation includes provisions for electronic filing of campaign finance reports, mandatory training for treasurers of political committees, and prohibits entities besides corporations, namely LLCs, from making political contributions.

The bill now awaits signature by the Mayor. If signed, the bill will take effect in 2015.

Photo of the John A. Wilson Building couresty of Andrew Wiseman on Wikimedia Commons.

The topic of a living wage in Washington, D.C. has been revived in the City Council.

A new proposal would increase the DC minimum wage to $11.50 per hour by 2016, making the wage one of the highest in the country.

The Council could vote on the measure as early as December.

The D.C. City Council failed to overturn a mayoral veto of The Large Retailer Accountability Act, a bill requiring large retailers with corporate sales of $1 billion or more to pay their employees a “living wage” of $12.50 per hour.

Seven of the 13 city council members voted to support the override of the veto, which was two votes shy of the nine votes needed for the measure to pass.

Voters in the District of Columbia participated in a special election Tuesday and chose a familiar face. Anita Bonds held off five challengers to win the council seat she currently occupies. Bonds was chosen to temporarily hold the at-large seat after Phil Mendelson became the council chairman.

Bonds declared victory shortly after midnight and according to unofficial results collected 32 percent of the vote. Her closest competitor, Elissa Silverman garnered 28 percent of the vote.

Turnout was very low for the special election, which was the district’s second special election in the past three years. One voter said, “I didn’t know any of them. But I’m a Democrat. So I voted for – who was it? – Anita (Bonds).”

The voters also passed a ballot measure seeking to give the district autonomy over spending its tax dollars. The measure, which passed with more than 80 percent approval, would allow the district to spend its tax dollars without congressional approval.

The measure will become law unless the United States Congress passes a disapproval resolution and that resolution is also signed by President Obama. The measure is the latest in the long struggle for district citizens to break free from the leash of the federal government.

One voter said, “We can take care of ourselves.”

Photo of the John A. Wilson Building by Awiseman on Wikipedia.

The District of Columbia Board of Elections has announced that a special election will take place on April 23, 2013.

This special election will be held to fill the at-large D.C. council seat of Phil Mendelson.

Mayor Vincent Gray and Attorney General Irvin Nathan have introduced a proposal for an overhaul of the city’s campaign finance laws. The proposal includes pay-to-pay provisions that will limit when contractors may contribute to public officials. It will also make electronic disclosure mandatory and increase the disclosures already in place. The proposal would also ban lobbyists from bundling political contributions.

These proposed reforms come at a time when the district has been inflicted with a rash of campaign scandals, including one involving Mayor Gray’s campaign.

The proposal will now go through a public comment period until September 17th. At that point, the proposal will be formally sent to the district council.

Photo of the John A. Wilson Building by Awiseman on Wikipedia.

Federal: “Group wants investigation of lobby shop after Owens’s Taiwan trip” by Mike Zapler in Politico.

District of Columbia: “Second Gray aide charged in campaign probe” by Tom Howell, Jr. in The Washington Times.

Missouri: “Already charged by feds, former Gov. Wilson fined by ethics cops, too” by Jake Wagman in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Pennsylvania: “Veon’s ex-aide gets house arrest” by Brad Bumsted in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

Federal: “Two SEC Commissioners Could Dramatically Change Campaign Finance” by George Zornick in The Nation. ↬via Eric Brown’s Political Activity Law blog.

California: “State political watchdog ramps up enforcement” by Brian Joseph in the Orange County Register.

Connecticut: “Connecticut legislators set focus on campaign finance reform; look to increase transparency” by Jordan Fenster in The Register Citizen.

District of Columbia: “Campaign money orders to cease?” by Jim McElhatton and Luke Rosiak in the Washington Times.

District of Columbia: “D.C. ethics law overhaul hampered by hiring difficulties, enforcement duties” by Mike DeBonis in The Washington Post.

A former D.C. council candidate and a ward commissioner are submitting a ballot measure which would ban corporate contributions to electoral campaigns if approved by voters this November.

The summary of the initiative states that it will restore the public trust by eliminating the outsized influence corporate money has in D.C. government and elections by prohibiting direct contributions from corporations to elected officials and candidates for public office. The measure would align D.C. with federal law, which bans direct corporate contributions to public officials and candidates.

Proponents of the measure need to collect over 22,000 signatures from registered voters within six months for it to appear on the November ballot.

What if the nation’s capitol had been built with a giant bronze chicken on top of it? What if the Washington Monument had been built with a giant statue of the first president standing atop? How about a Lincoln Memorial built as a giant pyramid?

This week’s Highlighted Site of the Week is the National Building Museum’s Unbuilt Washington, the official site for the exhibit that shows you “what might have been” in our nation’s capital.

According to the site: “Unbuilt Washington reveals the Washington that could have been by presenting architectural and urban design projects that were proposed but, for widely varied reasons, never executed. … The physical character of Washington, D.C., that we take for granted today is the unique result of countless decisions, debates, successes, failures, reconsiderations, missed opportunities, and lucky breaks. To tourists and residents alike, the city’s greatest landmarks may seem so appropriate, so correct—it is hard to imagine that they could have turned out completely differently. But nothing in the built environment of Washington [or in any other city, for that matter] is predestined.”

You will find an interactive Google map for the sites of the would-be sites and memorials described in Unbuilt Washington.

Don’t miss the exhibit, which runs from November 19, 2011 – May 28, 2012.  Here is the National Building Museum’s Twitter feed and Facebook.

You may enjoy this video about the exhibit courtesy of ABC 7 News.

Here is a video with the curator describing models in the exhibit:

Have a terrific weekend!