Welcome to Save Our Safety Net (SOS-DC). Over the last three years, the District of Columbia has cut more than $100 million dollars in funding for services like domestic violence resources, affordable housing, and childcare, services that help struggling low-income families, and keep our communities secure and strong. Between summer of 2009 and spring of 2010, SOS-DC called attention to DC’s escalating fiscal crisis and demanded smart, responsible action to Save Our Safety Net.
Instead of more budget cuts to programs residents need, SOS-DC proposed that City Council could take a progressive approach: Raise taxes on the city’s highest income earners, who suffer least during the recession. New tax brackets on the District’s top 5% of earners could generate enough funding to prevent the worst of the cuts, and invest in an economic recovery that would include everyone.
Our message resonated throughout the city. Thousands of DC residents stood with us, wrote to their Councilmembers, joined us at rallies and actions, and spread word through mainstream and social media. As the campaign developed, progressive tax reform became a serious issue for City Council. Five Councilmembers declared their support for new tax brackets (thereby becoming “Safety Net Superheros,” capes and all). On the day of the budget vote, all five voted for progressive tax increases that would benefit the safety net.
Though the progressive tax reform amendment ultimately fell two votes short, the set of safety net cuts in the final budget was far smaller than those originally proposed by Mayor Fenty. But the city remains fiscally insecure, and the depth and breadth of poverty continues to grow. Drastic change is needed.
City Council finally approved the FY2011 budget yesterday. Even as unemployment approaches 40% in Ward 8 and homeless shelters overflow with families in crisis, even as thousands of DC residents call upon their leaders to raise the revenue that we need to invest for the future, the District Government will continue cutting funding for programs that support those in need and keep our communities strong.
Thousands of us asked them to take a smarter, more responsible course of action. We garnered support from nearly half of City Council, who declared it is time to raise taxes on those who suffer least during the recession, in order to invest in those who are struggling the most.
Our efforts weren't wholly in vain. Under pressure, and mostly at the last minute, Council restored funding for many programs that Mayor Fenty proposed to cut: job training, Rapid Housing, adult education, DC's Earned Income Tax Credit, affordable child care, civil legal services, the Home Purchase Assistance Program, and Grandparent Caregiver Support all avoided massive cuts.
These programs don't just save lives. They are smart investments. To truly pave the way to economic recovery that includes everyone, the City would need to increase their funding -- but for now we thank those on City Council who fought to preserve their current budgets.
Yet the serious cuts that passed elsewhere in the budget are clear proof of the S.O.S. campaign's urgent message: DC needs to progressively generate more revenue, or else it will continue to divest from critical programs that keep our communities strong.
Worst of all the cuts are a triple-punch to families that are struggling with homelessness -- a population that has grown by 36% since 2008. $1.3 million has been cut from Emergency Rental Assistance, which is one-time assistance that helps households avoid eviction. Last year's $4 million cut to homeless services has been sustained, which means we'll continue to see shelters with families sleeping on floors, or turned away entirely.
Cuts were also sustained to the Local Rent Supplement program, which funds the development of affordable housing.
Elsewhere, Interim Disability Assistance (IDA) was also hit hard, with a cut of $6 million. IDA provides temporary cash assistance to disabled adults -- it's often their only source of financial support besides Food Stamps. More than a thousand disabled District residents will now be waitlisted for IDA -- many will lose their homes, resort to begging or worse. (Read more about IDA here.)
Elsewhere, the Council also chipped away at funding for mental health services ($1.4 million); Income Maintenance Administration Service Center staff ($1 million), who process applications for health care, Food Stamps, child care, and other programs; the Captive Insurance Program ($1 million), which provides malpractice insurance to health clinics; and Office of Latino Affairs, which provides grants to nonprofit.
These cuts will negatively impact the quality of life in our city as a whole. And in the long run, when struggling residents' problems become crises, this will end up costing the District government even more.
It didn't have to be this way. Our elected officials had the knowledge and power to change course. They could have chosen to invest rather than divest. They could have taken bold, responsible leadership; they could have acknowledged that -- with a top tax bracket currently at $40,000 -- the District's wealthiest residents can readily pay a more fair share. We applaud the leadership of Councilmember Jim Graham (Ward 1), who introduced an amendment for new tax brackets starting at $350,000/year, and his colleagues who stood up with him to be Safety Net Superheroes: Councilmembers Michael Brown, Harry Thomas (Ward 5), Tommy Wells (Ward 6), Marion Barry (Ward 8).
As for Mayor Fenty, Chairman Gray and others in Council who voted against a fair share, we dedicate this video by Liane Scott of Empower DC:
On March 4th, the shelter, designed to hold up to 135 families, was at 851 residents--including 400 children. In the face of press attention, the administration worked to move families out. Now here we are again, at full capacity.
Even worse, 25 families have recently been turned away from shelter, even though they have no other place to go, according to the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless. And almost 300 families are on the waiting list for emergency shelter. That's right, a waiting list for emergency shelter. These are families in crisis and waiting exacerbates many of these crises.
Meanwhile, the DC Council continued harmful budget cuts to homeless services -- a reduction of 24% from the FY2010 to FY2011 Proposed Budget (see chart below), even as the number of families experiencing homelessness has grown by 37% in the last two years.
Housing development costs money. But in the end it also saves money -- in court costs, shelter costs, remedial assistance, and more. But instead of making these investments, the city has cut funding for the Emergency Rental Assistance Program and Local Rent Supplement Program.
Our leaders could have invested in the economic recovery and saved hundreds of families from the streets by asking more of our highest-earning 5% of DC residents. But instead they shuffled funding around and let the pie continue to shrink. It wasn't brave leadership, and it wasn't responsible. DC deserves better.
Yesterday was the big vote. We weren't victorious with our proposal but our efforts were successful in pressuring Council to restore some of the worst cuts.
The final week of this budget season was a testament to the importance of civic engagement and direct action in holding our leaders accountable. In initial budget meetings, the tone of discussions was bleak. Over $25 million in cuts was still on the table, and there was very little talk of real solutions -- just regressive taxes and furloughs of government employees.
Sensing that our Safety Net Superheroes were flagging in resolve, we mobilized: hundreds of SOS supporters called, emailed, and visited Councilmembers. Together, we urged them to "earn their capes."
Then yesterday morning, minutes before the budget hearing began, over 50 supporters assembled one last time at City Hall. We updated everyone on the state of the budget as of that morning, then we made our way upstairs and straight into the private breakfast meeting where the Council was discussing last-minute changes to the budget. Councilmembers Tommy Wells (Ward 6), Mary Cheh (Ward 3), Yvette Alexander (Ward 7), Muriel Bowser (Ward 4), Jack Evans (Ward 2), Phil Mendelson (At-Large), David Catania (At-Large), and Michael Brown (At-Large) were all there.
To their surprise, we busted in to the meeting and delivered our message that their cuts don't add up and DC deserves better. We told them that we need a strong safety net, and heroes who will stand up and defend it. We held up our calculators and chanted "the math is whack!"
Kymone Tecumseh Freeman pointed out: "The math you guys have does not make sense. We have a bag tax. We have a soda tax. This affects the least of us the most. Why won't you tax the people who can afford to pay it?"
Sherita Evans, case manager at Bread for the City, approached her Councilmember Yvette Alexander. "Here," Sherita said while dropping cash on the table. "If I can leave $10 on the table to save our safety net, so can you."
Chairman Vincent Gray opened the door to the room as we were delivering our message, only to turn and beat a hasty retreat down the hall. Andrew Willis Garces, SOS steering committee member, yelled after him, "Chairman Gray, you can be the sensible leader our city needs."
Louise Thundercloud spoke next, "As a person who has experienced homelessness in the past, you risk me becoming homeless again, and possibly dying out on the street. You're also threatening our mental health services. You're showing how morally and spiritually bankrupt you folks are."
Outside the room, 75 SOS protesters shouted chants: "Chairman Gray, Chairman Gray, how many cuts have you made today?" and "Show some guts! Stop the cuts!"
Finally, security escorted us out of the room and into the hall, where we kept chanting and dancing, and even made a safety net out of ticker tape. (As you can see, some SOS volunteers are serious nerds.)
The protest itself garnered a media frenzy (see below for hits) -- but we still didn't know whether it would be enough to get an amendment put to a vote. Michael Brown (At-Large) said he was still not proposing the brackets, because the bulk of the programs he cared about had been restored. We ran into Councilmember Marion Barry (Ward 8) in the elevator. His first words were, "I heard y'all had a protest." He promised to vote for the amendment if it was introduced.
Then we learned Jim Graham (Ward 1) was ready to introduce an additional bracket (8.9%) on household income starting at $350,000 a year. When the debate started, his amendment was the first proposal. At just $12.7 million, it would have generated less revenue than our proposal for two new brackets starting at $200,000 -- but it was a good start. Most important, Graham specifically tied the new revenue to reverse many of the worst cuts:
Rapid Housing (1.1 million)
Grandparent Caregiver Program (2 million)
Emergency Rental Assistance Program (1.3 million)
Homeless Shelter (1.3 million)
Interim Disability Assistance (1 million)
Homeless Services (4 million)
Local Rent Supplement Program (1 million)
Office of Latino Affairs (1 million)
Harry Thomas (Ward 5), Marion Barry, Tommy Wells, and Michael Brown chimed in their support. They earned their capes, and you can thank them now for their leadership.
Phil Mendelson seemed to suggest that higher taxes would make our fiscal crisis worse. I'm not sure of the logic, since our proposal results in a stable source of currently-untapped revenue for the city. He voted against.
Jack Evans and David Catania also opposed the amendment. We expected as much, because they are simply not progressive in ideology. We were more disappointed by other leaders.
Kwame Brown shot down the proposal for reasons that frankly don't make sense. He balked because Jim Graham didn't proposed additional funding for job training, and went so far as to suggest that the rest of the safety net actually programs "keep people down." The crowd hissed at this.
I wonder how Kwame Brown thinks people in job training programs are able to get by while they train for jobs. In most cases, they use food stamps. They need affordable child care. They need subsidies when they can't afford DC's high housing costs. And how can he say that programs for children in foster care and those who are too disabled to work "keep people down"?
Last time we spoke with Kwame Brown, he told us he needed "more information" to decide what revenue would be best to save the safety net. In the end, he did not vote for this proposal and suggested no alternatives. Given his candidacy for Council Chair, maybe he was too busy to do his homework.
Then came Yvette Alexander. Alexander acknowledged that her ward has some of the highest poverty rates in the city, and needs these safety net services as much as any community. Throughout this campaign, her office expressed support for our proposal.
But Alexander let us down, and let her constituents down, and she didn't do it quietly. She scolded us for pressuring the Council rather than first asking the Mayor to change the budget's course. (She was wrong.) And then she proceeded to reject the notion that people of wealth and privilege should be expected to pay a fair share back to their city. In the Washington Business Journal's coverage of the debate, they quote her as saying, "Let's be fair. You can't just depend on the resources of a few for the masses. You just can't do that."
Several SOS volunteers from Ward 7 expressed disappointment and wondered how in touch Councilmember Alexander could possibly be with her constituents.
Finally, Chairman Vince Gray. He was agitated. Our action put the Chairman and the rest of the Council in a tight spot. But rather than accept responsibility and take bold action, Gray blamed the Mayor for the state of the budget and lauded the Council's efforts to restore a few hundred thousand here and a million there out of the dozens of millions of Fenty's cuts to the safety net. Gray let us down. He could have taken a bold, progressive course away from Fenty's destructive policies; instead, he played politics. And people struggling to make ends meet will suffer for it.
In the end, we only had five of the seven votes we needed to raise millions in funding that could restore the safety net.
But without our work together, this proposal would not have been seriously considered as part of the budget conversations, let alone proposed as an amendment and subject to a public vote. Our campaign demonstrated that progressive taxation was the solution before the Chairman and Council. We now know where our true leaders stand, given the choice between cuts to essential services that keep our city healthy and strong or turning for support to those who suffer the least in the recession.
The public needs to know that this is a viable option -- and this is the first step to building broad progressive consensus. In the meantime, we learned a lot about how we can build support for even stronger policy in the future.
Please be in touch if you want to help us think about what's next.
![Homeless Services Budget Data (1) (version 1).xlsb [Recovered]](http://img.skitch.com/20100614-mrb9cm94a7nnragur6wptg1mkp.preview.jpg)
