City Paper is not for tourists
I FIND THE LOOSE LIPS column about the so-called Georgetown forum (8/20), a question-and-answer grilling from about 10 persons sitting around a table with no audience participation, to be a misrepresentation of Dave Clarke’s positions.
Contrary to the assertions in the article, Clarke said he opposed removal of restrictions on the size of community residence facilities and favored their equal distribution throughout the city. He indicated that the bill to restrict persons living together as a family through requiring rooming house licenses for such groups would not be a good approach, for it would result in group homes going to neighborhoods which are not zoned solely for single families, such as neighborhoods in Dupont Circle, Adams Morgan, Foggy Bottom, Mount Pleasant, and Capitol Hill. He said that he did favor parking restrictions, but attempted to enter into dialogue about various alternatives. He indicated that the proposed Georgetown power plant would serve far more than Georgetown University and would be inappropriate for a residential neighborhood. While agreeing that Georgetown had a valid interest in not having a concentration of taverns, he indicated that a numerical cap standard, rather than mentioning Georgetown specifically in a law, would be a better approach. He said he favored liquor-license moratoriums for certain neighborhoods. Dave never won any awards for being the most charming, and he has the well-deserved reputation of speaking honestly and not just giving the answers people most want to hear, especially about complicated issues.