Legislating for the Nation's capital

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Legislating for the Nation's capital
Physical Description:
v. : ; 24 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- Congress. -- Senate. -- Committee on the District of Columbia
Publisher:
U.S. Govt. Print. Off.
Place of Publication:
Washington
Frequency:
annual cumulates biennially
other
normalized irregular

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Legislation -- Washington (D.C.)   ( lcsh )
Genre:
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
legislation   ( marcgt )

Notes

General Note:
CIS Microfiche Accession Numbers: CIS 76 S302-7, CIS 75 S302-2, CIS 74 S302-1, CIS 73 S302-2, CIS 72 S302-1, CIS 71 S302-1
General Note:
"Report on the activities of the Committee on the District of Columbia"
General Note:
Ninety-fourth Congress, 1975-76.
General Note:
Reuse of record except for individual research requires license from LexisNexis Academic & Library Solutions.
General Note:
Reuse of record except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc.
General Note:
At head of title: 94th Congress, 2d session. Committee print.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 023811652
oclc - 02939879
Classification:
lcc - KF49
System ID:
AA00024762:00001

Full Text
L;_5

94th Congress COXXITTEE PRINT
2d Session





LEGISLATING FOR THE NATION'S CAPITAL




REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES SENATE
IN THE
NINETY-FOURTH CONGRESS 1K5-1976
[Pursuant to Senate Resolutions 30, 316, and 367] 01










Printed for the use of the Committee on the District of Columbia

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
7M25 WASHINGTON : 1976







































COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
THOMAS F. EAGLETON, Missouri, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR., Maryland
ADLAI E. STEVENSON, Illinois DEWEY F. BARTLETT, Oklahoma
JOHN GLENN, Ohio JAKE GARN, Utah
ROBERT HARRIS, Staff Director and General Counsel
ANDREW E. MANATOS, Associate Staff Director

(II)











CONTENTS

Page

Statistical sumr-----------------------4
Public Lw----------------------------5
Additional law clerks for D.C. Court of Appeals judges (Public Law
94-191)------------------------------------------------------ 5
Establish the judicial conference of the District of Columbia (Public
Law 9413----------------------Metro Transit Police (Public Law 94-306) ---------------------------6
Extension of District of Columbia Medical and Dental Manpower
Act of 1970 (Public Law 9438-----------------6
District of Columbia Code (Public Law 9436------------7
Financial planning, reporting, and control systems for the Government of the District of Columbia (9-9)-------------7
Two-year extension of prohibition )against the Council's revising the
criminal laws (Public Law 94-402)-----------------9
Prohibiting the unlawful use of a rented motor vehicle (Public Law

Park Police pay comparability (Public Law 94-533) -------------------10
Senate Concurrent Resolution Reotd----------------11
S. Con. Res. 78 disapproving the act of the District of Columbia Council (1-57) entitled the Refunding Bond Authorization Act ------------11
District of Columbia Government Acts Referred to Committee-------------15
Presidential Nominations Reerd------------------73
Ira)



















Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2013













http://archive.org/details/legfornaOOu nit















LEGISLATING FOR THE NATION'S

CAPITAL



REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
UNITED STATES SENATE, IN THE NINETYFOURTH CONGRESS



INTRODUCTION

Article I, section 8, of the Constitution of the United States vests in Congress the power:
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forte, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings ;Standing rules of the Senate provide that "[w] hen nominations shall be made by the President of the United States to the Senate, they shall, unless, otherwise ordered, be referred to appropriate comittees . ." and authorize the Committee -on the District of Columbia to, receive and consider:
All proposed legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and other matters relating to:1. * [TJ he municipal affairs of the District of Columbia in general, other
,than appropriations therefore, including2. Public health and safety, sanitation, and quarantine regulations.
3. Regulation of sale of intoxicating liquors.
4. Adulteration of food and drugs.
5. Taxes and tax sales.
6. Insurance, executors, administrators, wills, and divorce.
7. Municipal and juvenile courts.
8. Incorporation and organization of societies.
'9. Municipal code and amendments to the criminal and corporation laws.
Further, the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 provides that:
To assist the Congress in appraising the administration of the laws and in developing such amendments or related legislation as it may. deem necessary, each standing committee of the *Senate and the House of Representatives shall exercise contiious watchfulness of the execution by the'administrative agencies concerned of 'any laws, the subject matter of which Is within the jurisdiction of such committee; and, for that purpose, shall study all pertinent reports and data submitted to the Congress by the agencies in the executive branch of the Government.






2
This report, prepared pursuant to Senate Resolutions 30, 316, and
summarizes the committee's execution of its responsibilities in the Niiiety-Fourth Congress.
With the advent of home rule in the District of Columbia the role of the committee has changed from that of being primarily legislative .to that of investigating and overseeing the legislation passed by the ,government of the District of Columbia. Under Public Law 93-198, the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act (commonly known as the Home Rule Act), the Congress has 30 legislative days (days when both Houses are in session) to veto an act of the District of Columbia government. If a resolution to disapprove is not passed by both Houses the act automatically becomes law. During this Congress 87 District of Columbia governinent acts were referred to the committee. Each one of these acts was considered and reviewed by the committee staff. The committee, of course, is reluctant in these early years of home rule to initiate action Of disapproval and only one such resolution was passed by the committee. This action was taken after hearings were held on the subject and the Senate concurred on a, rollcall vote of 80 to 3. The House Disti-let Committee did not concur in the action of the Senate so the resolution was never reported to the House.
The committee continues to initiate and report legislation and to make investigations and examinations of District affairs as mandated by the Constitution and the rules of the Senate.
This committee has a responsibility to insure the continued viability of the Capital City. The District government faces a serious fiscal problem over the next several years. Pursuant to Senate Resolution 316 this committee entered intou contract with Arthur Andersen & Co., an independent accounting firm, to perform a, survey of the District's financial situation. This survey provided the, basis for a number of hearings before the committee which culminated in the passage of H.R. 11009 (Public Law 94-399).
Public Law 94-399 provides for the establishment of the Temporary Commission on Financial Oversight for the District of Columbia. It also provides the wherewithal to make improvements in the financial system of the District. of Coliunbia that should have been made before home rule. Through this law and this Commission the committee hopes and expects the District to have a good, solid financial management and accounting system, without a lot of expensive frills. but which provides the necessary information in accurate and timely fashion and which operates efficiently so as to maximize the ,city"s financial resourm.
On September 13, 1976, Senators Eagleton, Chiles, and Mathias were named as the Senate representatives on the Commission. At the first meeting of the Commission, Senator Ea-gleton was, elected chairman of the Temporary Commission.
Other public laws resulting from committee activities: (1) provided an additional law clerk for each of the judges of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals; (2) established the. Judicial Conference of the District of Columbia; (3) extended the District of Columbia Medical and Dental Manpower Act of 1970 for one year; (4) established the Metro Security Police force to provide for the pro-






3

section of patrons, personnel, and property of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority; (5) directed the Law Revision Nunsel to prepare and publish the D.C. Code through the supplements of the present edition; (6) placed a two-year extension of prohibition against the D.C. Council's revising the criminal laws; (T)' provided tie Park Police the same cost-of-living increases as are given to employees under the General Schedule; ai d (8) prohibited the unlawful use of a rented motor vehicle in the District of Columbia.
The committee also held oversight hearings on the District of Columbia Revenue Act of 1975; examination of District of Columbia fismI affairs; economic and demographic projections for the District of Columbia; metropolitan area problems; pension systems of District of Columbia employees; rent control; and accounting and financial management practices of the District of Columbia government.
Five nominations were referred to the committee, three were confirmed by the Senate; one was reported to the Senate; and no action was taken on one.
Following is a statistical summary of the committee's activities during the 94th Congress:















STATISTICAL SUMMARY

ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE'DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 94TH CONGRESS

1975, 1st sess. 1976, 2d sess. Totil

REFERRED BY THE SENATE
Presidential messages 2 1
D.C. government acts ---------------- 58 29 87
Senate bills ------------------------- 7 6 13
House 6 8 14
Senate resolutions------------------- 2 4 6
Senate concurrent resolutions--------- 2 1 3
Nominations ------------------------ 3 2 -5
Petitions --------------------------- 1 1 2
Proposed legislation------------------ 0 1 1
27 21 48

Total ------------------------ 108 74 182
REPORTED TO THE SENATE
Senate bills ------------------------- 0 0 0
House 2 8 10
Senate resolutions------------------- 2 2 4
Senate concurrent resolutions 1 0 1
Nominations ------------------------ 2 2 4
Total- 7 12 19
SENATE AND HOUSE ACTS WHICH HAVE
BECOME LAW
Public- 2 7 9
Private ----------------------------- 0 0 0
Total ------------------------ 2 7 9
HEARINGS HELD
Senate bills ------------------------- 0 4 4
House 2 6 8
Senate resolutions------------------- 1 0 1
Nominations ------------------------ 3 1 4
Oversight investigations 4 11 15
Total ------------------------ 10 22 32
MEETINGS
Hearings- 7 16 23
Executive sessions ------------------- 0 1 1
Conference sessions ------------------ 0 1 1
Total- 7 is 25

(4)










PUBLIC LAWS

PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL LAW CLERK~S FOR THLEJUDGES OF TIHE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

(Public Law 91-191)
The House of Representatives passed H.R. 4287 on N ovember 10, 1075, and the committee held a hearing on the measure on December 3; it was considered and amended by the committee and reported to the Senate (S. Rept. 94-523) on December 10. The Senate passed H.R. 4287, as amended, on December 12. On December 19 the House agreed to the Senate amendment and it was approved by the President on December 31.
The law amends the District of Columbia Code in order to authorize an additional law clerk for each of the nine judges of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. This additional law clerk brings the total number of law clerks for each associate judge to two and brings the total for the chief judge to three. The general purpose of the legislation is to increase the analysis and research capability of the Court, thereby enhancing its case disposition capacit-y. The reason for Federal legislation in this otherwise local administrative matter is that law clerks are provided for by section 708 of the D.C. Code which the City Council is prohibited from amending by section 602 (a) (4) of the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act. The Senate amendment amends the District of Columbia Law Revision Commission Act so as to allow the appointment of the staff of the Commission from outside the competitive service, as is the case with most District of Columbia employees employed in similar positions.

ES:_-TABLISH: THIE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF TIrE DISTRICT OF COLUMIBIA

(Public Law 94-193)
The purpose of this law is to authorize and direct the chief judge of the District. of Columbia Court of Appeals to convene an annual judicial conference designed to improve the operation of the civil and criminal justice system in the District of Columbia. It provides a mechanism whereby the local bench and bar are brought together periodically on a regular basis to discuss major problems incident to the administration and enforcement of the laws of the District of Columbia, and to make recommendations for solutions to such problems. The House bill was amended by the Senate to correct an error in the final version of the Education Amendments of 1974, which omitted the District of Columbia from eligibility for funding under title IV of those Amendments.
(5)

79-825--76---2






6
H.R. 10035 passed the House on November 10, 1975; a hearing was held by the committee on December 3; reported to the Senate on December 9, with an amendment (S. Rept. 94-524) ; passed the Senate, as amended, on December 12; the House agree to the Senate amendment on December 19; and the President approved on December 31, 1975.
METRO TRANSIT POLICE
(Public Law 94-306)
Public Law 94-306 authorizes the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to establish and maintain a regular Metro Transit Police force. It provides Congressional consent to amendments to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact in order to establish and maintain the Metro Transit Police force; defines the role and jurisdiction of said police force; and authorizes the issuance of rules and regulations by the Transit Authority for safe and effective transit facility operations.
A hearing was held on H.R. 8719, which passed the House on July 281 1975. The bill was reported to the Senate on May 13, 1976, with an amendment, passed the Senate, as amended, on May 18; the House agreed to the Senate amendment on May 24; and the President approved the bill oil June 4,1976.
EXTENSION oFDisTRicT OF COLUMBIA MEDICAL ANDDENTAL MANPOWERACT OF 1970
(Public Law 94-308)
This law extends for one year the District of Columbia Manpower Act of 1970. It allows the continuation of present Federal assistance through fiscal year 1977 to Georgetown University Schools of Medicine and Dentistry and The George Washington University School of Medicine in the District of Columbia. This assistance was needed because of severe financial strains on these schools. Without this help the quality of medical and dental educational programs would suffer and there would have been a diminution in the medical and dental services available.
Grants under this legislation are limited to the minimum amounts necessary and may not exceed $5,000 per enrolled medical student, or $3,000 per enrolled dental student. Because of the precarious financial condition of the District of Columbia no local funds were available for fiscal year 1977. The schools are committed to seeEng alternate funding sources for fiscal year 1978.
H.R. 12132 passed the House on April 12, 1976. A hearing wa& held on April 29; reported favorably to the Senate on May 13; passed the Senate May 21; and became puV!ic law on June 4,1976.




R








DISTRICT OF COTX31BTA CODE
(Public Law 94-3S6)
Public Law 94-386 directs the Law Revision Counsel of the House to resume codification and publication of the remaining supplements to the District of Columbia Code of 1973. Upon completion thereof (c. 1978), new additions of the District of Columbia Code shall be prepared and published under the direction of the Council of the District of Columbia.
The bill (H.R. 13121) passed the House May 24, 1976, was reported to the Senate August 3, passed the Senate August 5, and approved by the President August 14,1976.
Fi-NANCIAL PLANNING, REPORTING, A-NTD CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR THE,
GOVERNMENT OF THEDisTRiCT OF COLUMBIA

(Public Law 94-399)
The purpose of this law is to provide for a financial systems analysis, design, and implementation for the Government of the District of Columbia to insure that the financial statements of the Government of the District of Columbia accurately reflect the financial condition of the District of Columbia, and in order that an independent audit of the financial condition of the District Of Columbia can be conducted with meaningful results.
As a result of the State and local government fiscal crises of 197576, many governments have had to re-examine their financial structures, their economic base, and their ability to meet the increasing economic demands which are being placed on them. The need for sound financial reporting in the public sector has become increasingly apparent, both as warning device and management tool. Washington, D.C., is no exception to this pattern. It is unique in one respect, however: As the Nation's Capital, it has been under the control of Congress, and therefore the responsibility of Congress. There was thus an urgent need for Congressional action.
On February 24, 1976, the Committee on the District of Columbia entered into a contract with the public accounting firm of Arthur Andersen & Co. to perform a survey of the accounting and financial management practices of the District of Columbia government. Andersen submitted its report to the Committee on June 19, 1976. It listed a series of problems, many of them previously disclosed, which Andersen concluded make "[a]n audit of the District * not practicable at this time." The firm also noted that the "lack of reliable financial information results from weaknesses in financial controls which have evolved over a long period of time."
The Andersen report descri'_' ibes a number of improvements which must be made in the area of financial controls and reporting if the District is to receive an unqualified opinion on an annual independent audit. It is necessary to redirect the current effort to replace existing systems, and to train District personnel in the new systems which








mnay be installed. As these systems are being developed, immediate improvements must be made in the present accounting system to provide as much information as possible on the financial situation of the District of Columbia.
To enable such work to be carried out, the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Committee and the Chairman of the D,C. Appropriations Subcommittee introduced S. 3608 on June 23, 1976.
The Constitution requires that Congress maintain an oversight function with respect to the District of Columbia. While the city is substantially self -govlerning. the Federal Government does contribute, sizeable amounts of support in recognition of the special demands placed on the, Nation's Capital. Hence the Congress must ensure that the elected District Government is able to make efficient use of the avilable resources to meet the needs of its citizens and those of the Federal Government within its boundaries.
Historically, the District has -used the federal system of accounting and financial controls. This was completely appropriate prior to home rule. The Andersen report, however, indicated a number of changes in the financial systems that would have to be made in order to meet the requirements of a. municipality, requirements which did not exist when the District -was treated as an arm of the Federal Government. These changes should have been implemented prior to the granting of home rule, but the need was not foreseen at that time.
This legislation is intended to assure the continued viability of the District of Columbia, enhance the independence of the elected Government in the District. and minimize the future requirements for federal support. These are important goals, and are entirely consistent with Congressional oversight requirements.
The Andersen report noted deficiencies in a number of areas. Inadequacies in billing procedures, records of accounts receivable and grant accounting reduce the revenues which are collected by the District Government from various sources. Deficienees in payroll control, purchasing and material management, and welfare payment accounting can lead to expenditures in excess of those actually required. Improvements in these areas would be useful in closing the projected gap between income and spending.
Efficiencies in the operation of government can be realized, thus reducing, cost and increasing productivity. For example, the provTisionl of timely financial information to District management, and the elimination of duplicate or wasteful systems, would permit fewer employees to be even more responsive to'changing needs.
Finally, the provision of accurate financial reports to the public can have beneficial effects. Such information, especially if attested to by an independent public accountant, would undoubtedly improve investor confidence in District securities. The District will have to go to the municipal bond market to finance capital improvements, and the improvements to be wrought through this legislation could substantiall-y increase demand and reduce borrowing costs.
It should also be pointed out that such information would permit Congress to exercise more effectively its oversight function. The Committees on Appropriations could have greater confidence in the hiidfet data presented to them. and the Committees on the District of Columbia would be in a better position to evaluate District requests for additional sources and amounts of funding.




9

The General Accounting Office, which by law has a key role in monitoring the financial operations of the District, has repeatedly stated the need for improvements in the D)ist rict's bookkeepilng allnd reporting practices. The Comptroller G(eiwiral of the United States expressed his support for this legislation.
A Temporary Conmmnission on Financial Oversiglit of the D)istrict of Columbia was established consisting of three Memibers of the jtluse appointed by the Speaker, three Meimbers of thie Senate appointed byv the President of the Senate, thle Mayor, and the (Chairman of tlhe Council of the District of Columibia. It is the function of this Comtmission to carry out the development and implementation of the plans for improving the financial planning, reporting. and control systems on behalf of the government of the District of Columbia.
H.R. 11009, passed by the House on May 24, 197G. was ordered reported favorably with an amendment in lieu of S. (;nS on June 2. after taking into consideration testimony from a hearing held on JTune 28. The bill was reported that same day and was p)ased bvy time Senate, with the committee amendment. on July 1. The House disagreed to the Senate amendment and conferees met on July 22 and 2(;. The conferees agreed to file a conference report on July 26. Thle Ilouse agreed to the conference report on August 23 and the Senate agreed on August 24. The President approved on September 4, 1976 and it became public law.

TWO-YEAR EXTENSION OF PROIBITION AGAINST THE COUNCILS
REVISING THE CRIMINAL LAws
(Public Law 94-402)
This legislation extends for two additional years Congress' exclusive jurisdiction over the criminal laws of the District of Columbia. Its purpose is to give the Law Revision Commission adequate time to analyze the District of Columbia Criminal Code and to make specific recommendations to the Congress for comprehensive revision thereof. in order to turn over to the District of Columbia government updated and modern criminal code provisions.
H.R. 12261 passed the House on Aug. 23. 1976, after being amended on the House floor to include police regulations within the restrictions. The Senate took from the desk and passed it on August 24, and on September 7, 1976, it was approved by the President.
PROHIBITING THE UNLAWFUL USE OF A RENTED MOTOR VEHICLE
(Public Law 94-526)
This legislation fills a gap in existing law in the District of Columbia relating to the unauthorized use of rented motor vehicles so as to permit more effective prosecution for unlawful us of rented motor vehicles in the District. It promulgates for the District a vehicle conversion law similar in substance or effect to statutes in force in many States throughout the country. The criminal justice system in the District is now provided with the specifics with which to prosecute against the serious abuses of motor vehicle rental agreements, namely, failure to return motor vehicles at the end of the contract rental period.






10

The bill (IT.R. 10826) passed the House April 12, 1976. A hearing was held on September 22, it was ordered reported September 27, =d reported September 29. The Senate passed the legislation September 30, and on October 171 19 76 it was approved and became public law.

PARK POLICE PAY COMPARABILITY
(Public Law 9-1-0533)
The essential purpose of this legislation is to remove the United States Park Police from the pay adjustment provisions of the District of Columbia Police and Firemen's Salary Act of 1958, and to provide that future adjustments shall be made pursuant to the pay comparability system of the Federal Government. In making this change, it provides a beginning for the eventual transfer of Park Police salary, retirement, and other benefits from the District of Columbia law into the United States Code.
For many years the pay and benefits of the U.S. Park Police have been governed by the D.C. Police and Firemen's Act of 1958. Prior to the full implementation of the "Home Rule Act" it was logical to deal with salaries and benefits for the U.S. Park Police and the D.C. Metropolitan Police in a single piece of legislation, because the Congress I-lad the direct responsibility for compensation for both police forces. Now that the District of Columbia Council has the direct responsibility for the salary and benefits of the Metropolitan Police under the "Honie Rule Act" it was necessary to ensure that the Park Police would be treated the same as other Federal employees with regard to future pay adjustments and eliminates the need for Congress to consider new pay legislation every year or two in order to provide, the Park Police with appropriate cost-of-living increases.
H.R. 15276 passed the House September 13, 1976, a hearing was held before this committee on September 22, it was ordered reported on September 27, and was reported on September 29. The Senate passed it on October 1 and the President approved the bill on October 17, 1976.











SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REPORTED

DISAPPROVING THE ACT OF TILEDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COUNCIL (1-57)
ENTITLED, THE REFUNDING BOND AUTHORIZATION ACT
The purpose of S. Con. Res. 78 was to disapprove the action of the Council of the District of Columbia in authorizing the issuance of $50,000,000 General Obligation bonds of the District of Columbia. It was the Committee's view that the issuance of such bonds was illadvised and untimely.
The announced reason for the issuance of the bonds was to refinance certain borrowings from the U.S. Treasury which were undertaken during 1975 and which borrowings are repayable in 30 years with interest at 8 per c~entuln per annum. The act authorizing the bonds requires that the bonds be sold at a face rate of interest of no more than 8 per centum. per annum, also for a period of 30 years. The IDistrict government stated that if the bonds could be sold at a rate of 7 per centum, interest, a savings in interest payments on the $50,000,000 in bonds of about $400,000 per year might be realized. Secondly, the District had stated that it wished to issue the bonds so that it could test the acceptability of its debt offerings in the market place. Had the District received a favorable response, however, it intended to borrow an additional $100 million to $15-0 million in the corning year both to finance new capital projects and to refinance Treasury debt.
The District is required to maintain a balanced budget. Yet in Fiscal Year 1975, the District's expenditures exceeded receipts by $45.5 million. In addition, the District availed itself of its entire line of shortterm credit from the Treasury by borrowing $40 million. Had that borrowing not occurred, the cash shortfall would have been in excess of $85 million.
At the same time its cash position was weakening, the District government was also taking an additional step which was very reminiscent of New York City. It capitalized $25 million in short-term debt stating that it believed that this amount had previously been mistakenly charged to operating expenses when the work really involved capital improvements.
The foregoing are merely signals of more basic problems, which are not unique to the District, but beset many, if not all, center cities. They may be summarized as an overly large work force (one in every 12 District residents is on the D.C. payroll), unbudgeted wage demands which are granted without the necessary revenues to pay for the increases, unfunded pension liabilities (which are over $1 billion for the 36 per cent of the work force which is covered by Districtoperated pension plans), declining population, and a diminishing revenue base (which is exacerbated in the District by a stringent rent control law).






12,

When the foregoing facts were brought out at the hearings, the District government maintained that its financial problems were being exaggerated and that it would very shortly be able to work its way out of its problems. It indicated that it believed that the best test of its fiscal condition would be to allow the bonds to go to market and see how they were accepted.
Unfortunately, the Committee could not agree. The Committee felt that it was in the best long-range interests of the city and the Federal taxpayer to insure that the District received the highest possible rating in its first venture into the municipal bond market. This rating will have a significant impact on the interest rate the city will have to pay for its future borrowing.
The present system for maintaining financial records in the District of Columbia is a complex mixture of Federal and local procedures due to the unique character of the District as a Federal city. The Committee believed that there is a need for substantial improvements in the city"s accounting and financial reporting procedures. If these improvements are made before the city makes its first venture into the municipal bond market, the public will have an opportunity to get a clear picture, of the District's financial status and be better able to evaluate the bond issue. The Federal taxpayers will be assured that their contributions to the, Nation's capital will be used to protect Federal interests rather than to support unnecessarily high debt service costs. Furthermore, the Committee felt that it had an obligation not only to the District of Columbia, but also to the potential purchasers of the bonds who might not be aware of the financial condition of the District and the U.S. taxpayers who are making a substantial financial commitment to the Nation's capital through the Federal payment.
In attempting to obtain information about the financial condition of the District, the Committee has found that the books of the District are not kept in accordance with generally accepted 'accounting principles and that there has never been an outside independent audit of the Di strict's books. 'The Committee believes that these two conditions should be met before the public is offered District bonds. It intends to act through its oversight functions to ensure that theseconditions are met. However, since in the interim the District will continue to be able to borrow f rom the Treasury, the Committee believes that the District should refrain from going to the public market in order to finance its capital improvements.
The Senate concurred in the resolution of disapproval of the bond issue on a rollcall vote, of 80 to 3, but the House District Committee disapproved by a vote of 19-1, and so the Council act became D.C. Law






13

S. Con. Res. 78 Nov. 20, 1975
Mr. Eagleton, Mr. Bartlett, Mr. Garn, Mr. Glenn, Mr. Inonye, Mr.
Mathias, and Mr. Stevenson
Disapproving the Act of the District of Columbia Council (1-57) entitled "An Act to authorize the issuance of $50,000,000 General Obligation Bonds of the District of Columbia to refund certain loans made to the District from the United States Treasury".
Dec. 2, 1975.-Hearing. (Printed.) Dec. 3, 1975.-Ordered reported favorably. Dec. 4, 1975.-Reported favorably to Senate, without amendment (S.
Rept. 94-507).
Dec. 5, 1975.-Considered by Senate. Dec. 6, 1975.-Considered and passed by Senate, without amendment, by a rollcall vote of 80-3.
Dec. 8, 1975.-Referred to House District Committee. Dec. 11, 1975.-House District Committee considered and disapproved by a vote of 19-1.





























79-825-76-3














ACTS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REFERRED TO THE COMMITTE
[NoTE: The summaries of the acts of the government of the District of Columbia were written before the expiration of the Congressional review period and appear as so written herein.]
[ Indicates number of days both Senate and House met this session]
1-2 To SET TILE RATE OF PAY FOR MEMBERS OF THE ZONING CostMISSION AND THE BOARD OF ZONING ArPEALS AT $100 PER DAY
Effect of legislation: Legislation would allow the payment of $100 per day to members of the Zoning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals. These members are appointed by the Mayor with the advice and consent of the City Council and are not otherwise employed by the District of Columbia government or by the United States. Reported cost of legislation is $5,000 per member, with a total expected cost for both bodies of $30,000 per year.
Action by City Council: There were no public comments on this legislation received by the Council and no one asked to testify. It was adopted on second reading by a 12-0 vote, with one member absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council : Mar. 4, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Mar. 10, 1975.
Received by Senate: Mar. 17, 1975 (legislative day 30*).
Referred to committee: Mar. 18, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: May 15, 1975, D.C. Law 1-1.

1-3 To PROVIDE A FEDERALLY-FINANCED PROGRAMIJ OF SUPPLEMENTAL
LNEMPLOYM ENT BENEFITS FOR THOSE WHO HAVE EXHAUSTED THEIR ENTITLEMENTS TO BOTH REGULAR AND EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION; EFFECTIVE THROUGH 1975-76
Effect of legislation: Legislation would permit unemployed workers covered by unemployment compensation system to draw "benefits for a maximum, overall period of 53 weeks. Same national and state triggers governing District's payment of extended benefits would apply; conditions under which extended benefits may be paid by states and the District would be liberalized. Full reimbursement for the payments by federal government would result in savings to District of Columbia's unemployment insurance benefits fund.
Action by City Council: Measure was first adopted as an emergency resolution in January, 1975. Act 1-3-to amend the District of Columbia Unemployment Compensation Act-was adopted by the Council on second reading with a 12-0 vote (one member absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed: N one.
(15)






16

Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council : Mar. 4, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: MJar 4, 1975.
Received by Senate: Mar. 17, 1975 (legislative day 30*).
Referred to committee: Mar. 18, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: May 15, 1975. District of Columbia Law 1-2.
1-5 To CLARIFY STATUTORY DEFINITION OF CONDOMINIUMSM PROJECT"
IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Effect of legislation: Legislation would broaden definition of "condominium project" to eliminate confusion as to its meaning and to conform with definition used in 1964 Housing Act. It would permit development of condominiums in the District consisting of five or more apartments, rooms, office spaces, buildings and other units, which may be either contiguous or detached, in existing or proposed buildings or structures offered or proposed to be offered for sale. It would not allow for conversion of multifamily units prior to expiration of existing law on condominum conversions. Since existing law provides only for moratorium on conversion of rental unit properties, there would be no fiscal effect.
Action by City Council: Measure supported by District of Columbia Housing and Community Development Office. There were no other public comments received by the Council and no one asked to testify. Legislation was adopted on second reading by an 11-0 vote, with two members absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council : Mar. 11, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Mar. 27, 1975.
Received by Senate: Apr. 8, 1975 (legislative day 38*).
Referred to committee : Apr. 8, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: June 5, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-3.
1-6 To AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO LEASE OR GRANT REVOCABLE PERMITS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE ABANDONED TROLLEY CAR TUNNELS
UNDER DUPONT CIRCLE

Effect of legislation: Would authorize the Mayor to lease or grant permits for use of public space under Dupont Circle as commercial and entertainment mall areas and to set rents or fees for that use. Project is intended as bicentennial effort. Legislation would require no expenditure of District funds while generating revenue increasing the city's tax base.
Action by City Council: No public comments were received by the Council: no one asked to testify. Legislation was adopted on second reading by a vote of 10-0, with two members absent and one member present but not voting.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None. Impact on Federal interest in the District: None. Adopted by Council : Mar. 11, 1975. Approved by Mayor: Mar. 27,1975.






17

Received by Senate : Apr. 8,1975 (legislative day 38*).
Referred tocomnmittee: Apr. 8, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: June 5, 1975, District of Colunmbia Law 1-4.
1-7 To REPEAL "MAYOR'S AUTHORITY TO WITITIIOLD RENT PAYMENTS FROMt PUBLIC ASSISTANCE CHECKS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would repeal District of Colunlbia Public Assistance Act provisions authorizing Mayor to pay shelter allowances directly to landlords when welfare recipients fail, without legal basis. to make rental payments within 10 days of due date. It would return to the judicial system its role as arbiter of rental agreements between tenants who are public assistance recipients and their landlords, and. to the Department of IHuman Resources, its responsibilitv for adinistering District of Columbia public assistance programs. (There are more than 34,000 public assistance cases in the District of Columbia, the great majority of them involving use of rental dwelling units.)
Passage of measure has no fiscal implications for the District of Columbia.
Action by City Council: Neighborhood Legal Services staff was asked for comment, and recommended legislation's enactment. Legislation was adopted on second reading by a 12-0 vote, with one member absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Mar. 18. 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Mar. 27. 1975.
Received by Senate: Apr. 8, 1975 (legislative day 38*).
Referred to committee: Apr. 8, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: June 5, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-5.
1-9 To EL3fIINATE LirIT ON APPROPIrLATIOxNS FOR DISTRICT'S RENTr CONTROL PROGRA-31
Effect of legislation: Would permit appropriation of additional funds for operation of Rent Commission and administration of rent control program. Original appropriation liiit of $815.000 already has been exhausted; maintenance of services dependent upon further funding.
Action by City Council: Rent control pro-ram's need of funds cited at rent control hearings in January, 1975, and at more recent supplemental budget hearings. Legislation adopted on second reading by vote of 13-0.
Congressional/public interest expressed(: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District : None.
Adopted by Council: Apr. 1. 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Apr. 18.1975.
Received byv Senate: May 1.1975 (legislative day 52*).
Referred to committee: May 1. 1975.






18

Congressional review period expired: June 25, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-6.

1-10 To REGULATE SECURITY DEPOSITS ON RENTALS

Effect of Leg islation: Legislation would require: deposit of all security deposits by landlord in separate, interest-bearing accounts held in trust for that purpose.; p)aymient to tenant, upon termination of rental, interest on his deposit at rate no less than 5 percent; limit on amount of security deposit to equivalent of one month's rent; annual filing by landlords of reports on status and location of depositss held; penalties for non-compliance. Further provisions would regulate issuing of receipts, itemizing' of repairs made with deposit funds and refund of excess, other procedural matters. Legislation would have little or no financial impact, although possibly some administrative costs may be required.
Actioui by City Council: Concern over inadequacy of regulations protecting tenants' interests regadn seuiydposits was voiced by several witnesses in two sets of rent control hearings in January, 1974, and at least one member of the Advisory Panel on Rent Control in the District. Previous Council deferred action to new Council, which adopted legislation on second reading by a 13-0 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Correspondence -was received from a tenant group representative and one landlord. Both suppoi'ted the legislation. Landlord also expressed concern about accounting and administrative costs of compliance; problem of damage exceeding amount of deposit or of tenant relocating prior to payment of his last month's rent, requiring use of deposit to defray that loss at least in par't.
Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council : Apr. 1, 1975.
Approved by Mayor : Apr. 21,1975.
Received by Senate : May 1, 1975 (legislative day 52*).
Referred to commitee: May 1, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: June 25, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-7.

1-11 To IDENTIFY ORGAN DONORS BY NOTATION ON DRIVERS' LICENSES
A ND DCARDS ISSUED BY THlE DISTRICT OF COILUMBIA DEPARTMENT
oF MOTOR, VEHICLES
Effect of legislation: 'Would authorize Department of Motor Vehicles to establish an organ donor identification program under which a person -would: sign an anatomical gifts card signifying willingness to donate body organs for resQearch/transplant: have words "organ donor" printed on driver's license or ID card. The notation would not constitute legal authority permitting removal of organs, but simply alert doctor that gift card has been signed. Legislation is aimed primarily at increasing number of kidneys available for transplant in







the District of Columbia. No costs are expected. Kidney Foundation has volunteered to supply gift cards and information packets; additional printing by Department of Motor Vehicles costs nothing.
Action by City Council: Hearings were held in October, 1974. Cited were several highly successful, similar programs in 15 states, including Maryland and VirVInira. The District of Columbia's comparatively high rate of kidney f u e and low number of organs available for transplant also were noted. Legislation was adopted by the Council on second reading with a 13-0 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Active support from the Kidney Foundation, as noted above.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Apr. 1, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Apr. 21,1975.
Received by Senate: May 1, 197- (legislative day 52*).
Referred to committee: May 1, 1975._'
Congressional review period expired: June 25, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-8.
1-14 ToPERMIT CONTINUED USE OFDnYICE AS REFRIGERATINGAGENT
]BY VENDORS OF ICE CREAM ANDRELATED PRODUCTS WHO SELLFROM
TRUCKS AND STANDS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would waive, for truck and stand vendors of prepackaged frozen novelties, regulation passed in December, 1974, to require their use of certain equipment to refrigerate such products. Vendors have successfully and safely used dry ice for that purpose for some years; the substance keeps frozen items at temperature well below 450 level prescribed by health regulations and, according to EPA, creates no adverse health effects. Installation of freezing systems required by the 1974 recrulation-costing in excess of $2,000, according to Council findings-would place an unnecessary as well as unmanageable financial burden on small vendors, forcing many out of business and thus depriving District of Columbia residents and tourists of their services.
Action by City Council: As noted above, Council was assured by EPA that legislation is in conformance with the agency's health standards and that dry ice is an acceptable substitute for mechanical refrigeration. The measure was adopted on emergency basis February 25, 1975. Introduced again for consideration as a permanent act, it was adopted by the Council on second reading with a 12-0 vote, one member absent. '
Congressional /public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council: Apr. 22,1975. Approved by Mayor: May 6,19M
Received by Senate: May 22,1975 ) (legislative day 64*).
Referred to committee: May 22,1975.
Congressional review period expired: July 22, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-9.






20

1-15 To EXTEND MORATORIUM ON CONVERSION OF RENTAL UNIT PROPERTIES IN THlE DISTRICT OF COLUMrBIA INTO HORIZONTAL PROPERTY
REGIMES (CONDOMINIUMS)
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend through December 31, 197T5, the existing moratorium imposed on conversion of rental units to condominiums in the District. Extension would permit the City Council sufficient time to study and hold hearings on new condominium legislation to be proposed by the Mayor on or before July 1 of this year. (Original moratorium was imposed in measure setting forth various regul ations and standards for horizontal property regimes, which passed in 'October of 1974 and was effective through May 31, 1975. It prohibited the District of Columbia government's acceptance of applications for conversion of residential units into condominiums; voided previously served notices to quit; permitted appeals for exemption by owners.)
Action by City Council: The City Council passed Act 1-15 on second reading by a vote of 13-0. No hearings had been held.
Congress ionialvpublic interest expressed: None.
Im pact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council : May 6, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: May 27, 1975.
Received by Senate : June 4, 1975 (legislative day 67*).
Referred to committee : June 4, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: July 25, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-10.

1-16 To MAKE JANUARY 15-THE BIRTHDAY OF DR. MARTIN LUTHIER
KING-AN OFFICIAL, LEGAL BUSINESS HOLIDAY IN THE DISTRICT OF

Effect of legislation: Legislation would declare the birthday of Dr. King an official holiday in the District of Columbia, to be celebrated on
his actual birth date-January 15-rather than as a Monday holiday. The District's Office of Budget and Management Systems estimates cost to the city of $360,000 in overtime and premium wages for its employees and approximately $2.5 million in loss of production. There is currently no holiday in the District of Columbia to commemorate the achievements of a black citizen.
Action by City Council: After obtaining assurances from its general counsel re. its statutory authority to enact such a measure, the City Council passed Act 1-16 on second reading by a 10-0 vote, with three members absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: House Black Caucus members introduced 1I.R. 1810-to make Dr. King's birthday a Federal hioliday-earlier in this congress; however, no action was taken on it. City Council noted that some Congressional staff members expressed support for the District of Columbia measure in hopes that its passage might encourage similar Federal action.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council : Apr. 29,1975.






21

Approved by Mayor: May 28, 1975.
Received by Senate: June 11, 1975 (legislative day 72*).
Referred to committee: June 11, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Aug. 1, 1970. District of Columbia Law 1-11.

1-18 To EXTEND EFFECTIVE DATES OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUM BIA
PUBLIC POSTSECONDARY REORGANIZATION ACT, W IICii Ai VTIIORIZES CREATION OF A PUBLIC LA-ND GRANT UNIVERSITY Tuniw(oTai ( 'oNSoliDATION OF EXISTING PUBLIC POSTSECONDARY INSTITUTIONS IN Till
DISTRx(Yr

Effect of legislation: Legislation would delay until October 31, 1975, the effective date of Public Law 93-471--enacted by ("oiure;s to consolidate District of Columbia's public postsecondary schools into a single university-and extend for 90 days all other dates included in that measure. Congress passed Public Law 93-471 in October, 1974. with an effective date of July 1, 1975; in response to concern whether such action was appropriate on the eve of home rule, Congress also provided that, if the new City Council chose to repeal or amnend the legislation, its provisions as amended or modified should take effect on that date. The Council now feels additional time is required for further study and reworking of the bill, as well as to allow for the 30-day Congressional review period. Legislation also amends ]anguage, in the measure's statement of purpose to express the intent of the City Council rather than the intent of Congress, and specifies courses of study which the new university should offer the "widest possible number of citizens and residents" of the District.
Action by City Council: Hearings were held March 7-8, 1975, with witnesses equally divided between support and opposition for extending the effective date. City Council passed Act 1-18 on second reading May 27 by a vote of 11-0 (two members absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: May 27, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: June 13,1975.
Received by Senate: June 18, 1975 (legislative day 78*).
Referred to committee: June 19, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 10, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-12.
1-19 To PERMIT CONTIXUED OPERATION OF INCINERATOR AT TIE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA'S SOLID WASTE REDUCTION CE_TER No. 1 As INTERIM MEASURE PENDING DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVE WASTE
DISPOSAL PLAN
Effect of legislation: Legislation would amend District of Columbia Health Regulations by removing provision setting closure date for operation of incinerator at SWRC No. 1; instruct District of Columbia Department of Environmental Resources to produce by October 1, 1975, a plan for the facility's phase-out; require completion of that phase-out by January 1, 1977. Amendment removing closure date also

79-825-76----4






CW)
4144
would be submitted to EPA as proposed revision in District's Air Quality Implementation plan. Tests indicate the District of Columbia is currently meeting EPA ambient air quality standards for particulates; continued operation of incinerator will not prevent maintenance of those standards. No ready, economically feasible alternative to incinerator exists to handle disposal. of 1,000 tons of trash daily; shortrange methods available depend on landfills, for which cost would be prohibitive. Pilot projects and studies to develop alternative are underway.
Action by City Council: Hearings were conducted April 15, 1975. Council passed Act 1-19 on second reading, by a vote of 11-0 with two members absent.
Congressional/ ublic interest expressed: Witnesses at hearings reDresented Metropolitan Coalition for Clean Air and Mt. Pleasant Neighborhood Recycling Center. Opponents of removing closure date feared potential damage to air quality, but offered no supporting data. DEA tests indicated no ill effects to be expected for continueeincinerator use, as noted above.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: May 13,1975.
Approved by Mayor: June 19,1975.
Received by Senate,: July 8, 1975 (legislative day 84*). Referred to committee: July 9, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 22, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-13.
1-20 To END COMPULSORY PARTICIPATION BY MALE PUBLIC HIGH
SCHOOL STUDENTS IN THE CADET CORPS OF THE DISTRICT OF CoLuxBLA, PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM
Effect of legislation: Iiegislation would repeal provision of the Act of March 2, 1907, requiring every male high school student to participate in the Cadet Corps of the senior high schools in District of Columbia. It would not necessarily terminate the Corps' existence. Action by City Council Measure was approved by the District's Board of Education in February, 1975. No public hearings were held, and no adverse comments received. Council passed legislation on second reading by a vote of 11-0, with two members absent.
Congressional /public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council: May 13,1975.
Approved by Mayor: June 19,1975.
Received by Senate: July 8, 1975 (legislative day 84*).
Referred to committee: July 9, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 22, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-14.
1-21 To REPEAL THE AUTHORITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BoApm OF EDUCATION To ACCREDIT JUNIOR COLLEGES,
Effect of legislation: Legislation would repeal what the Board of Education considers obsolete law empowering it to accredit junior colleges operating in the District; any accreditation previously Conferred and still in force would stand for five years from enactment






23

of Act 1-21 or until the institution is otherwise accredited. Legislation resulted from recommendation by Board of Education. No adverse comments were received. The measure would have no fiscal effect.
Action by City Council: City Council passed the legislation on second reading by an 11-0 vote in the absence of two members.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None. Adopted by Council : May 13,1975. Approved by Mayor: June 19, 1975.
Received by Senate : July 8, 1975 (legislative day 84*).
Referred to committee: July 9, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 22, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-15.
1-22 To EXTEND EXISTING PROVISIONS OF ELEcTIoN LAW REGULATING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS BY UNIONS AND CORPORATIONS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend election law provisions regarding corporate and union contributions until July 1, 1976, or until repealed/amended/further extended by City Council. Purpose is to comply with sections of Public Law 93-376--in which Congress specified that provisions in question would expire July 1, 1975, unless action were taken by Council-while permitting additional time for hearings on subject scheduled to be held this summer. The legislation to be extended sets ceilings on permissible amounts of contributions by corporations and unions to candidates for city offices. No fiscal impact is anticipated as a result of extension.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held concerning extension of the provisions. City Council passed Act 1-22 on second reading by an 11-0 vote, with two members absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None. Adopted by Council : May 27,1975. Approved by Mayor: June 19,1975.
Received by Senate: July 8, 1975 (legislative day 84*).
Referred to committee: July 9,1975.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 22, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-16.
1-23 To DEFINE TERMINOLOGY To BE USED IN ALL ACTS AND RESOLUTIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Effect of legislation: Legislation-the General Legislative Procedures Act of 1975-would provide specific definitions of various terms to be used in all acts and resolutions of the City Council, as well as enacting clauses for such legislation.
Action by City Council: The City Council passed Act 1-23 on second reading by a vote of 9-0, with one member present but not voting and three members absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council : May 13, 1975.






24

Approved by Mayor: June 19, 1975.
Received by Senate: July 8, 1975 (legislative day 84*).
Referred to committee: July 9, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 22, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-17.
1-26 To REGULATE PUBLIC CONDUCT ON PUBLIC PASSENGER VEHICLES
SEATING 12 OR MORE PASSENGERS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would establish regulations governing the conduct of passengers while aboard public passenger vehicles in the District and set penalties for infractions. It would prohibit: smoking; eating or drinking; spitting; littering; carrying combustible or flammable materials, or animals other than seeing eye dogs properly harnessed or small animals "properly packaged"; standing in front of white line; boarding through rear exit door. Drivers would be perinitted to refuse transport to anyone whose immediately observable belavior constituted a violation of those regulations. Effective date would be September 30, 1975, rather than upon completion of Congressional review, allowing additional time for driver training and public notice of new rules.
Action by City Council: Public hearings were conducted April 7, 1975. and the bill adopted on final reading by a vote of 13-0. No action was taken by Mayor.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: June 3, 1975.
Enacted without Mayor's signature: June 24, 1975.
Received by Senate: July 8, 1975 (legislative day 84*).
Referred to committee: July 9, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 22, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-18.
1--?7 To ESTABLISH Co3nsIoSSl ON T- E ARTS AND HUMIIANITIES
Effect of legislation: Legislaton would create commission in office of the Mayor to proinote and develop programs in the arts and humanities for the District. Eighteen-member commission would serve as desicnated state agency for District of Columbia with regard to 1965 Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act: prepare annual plan of artistic projects and productions according to 1973 National Foundation on the Arts and -Tumanities Act provisions; make grants for such projects; initiate programs to encourage participation/appreciation of cultural activities. MAembers-to be appointed by Mayor on basis of special interest!activity/ability in arts and humanities-must be District of Columbia residents, geographically representative of the. city's neighborhoods. Bill permits reimbursement of expenses, but no salaries, for Commission members.
Action by City Council: Hearings were held April 1, 1975, on Act --27, which passed on second reading by an 11-0 Council vote (two members absent). Legislation was subsequently disapproved by Acting Mayor Julian Dugas in absence of Mayor Washington, but






25

forwarded to Congress nevertheless by Council on assumption that veto function may not be delegated.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in I)strict : None.
Adopted by Council : June 10, 1975.
Enacted without Mayor's signature: June 24. 19 )75.
Received by Senate: July 28. 1975 (legislative (lay 98*).
Congressional review period expired: Oct 20, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-22.
1-29 To RAISE ONTILY RATE OF PAYMENT FOR ADULT FOSTER IToME
CARE-INCLUDING DRUG ANI) ALCOHOLISM 11ALFWAY I1 OUSES-FRno
$170 TO $200
Effect of legislation: Legislation would increase to 9200 per month payment to public assistance recipients living in adult foster homes, residential placement facilities or hlalfwayv houses for alcoholics or drug addicts; of the $200, $180 would be designated for room, board and care, and $20 for clothing and personal needs. Act 1-29 also defines "adult foster home" as a residence for 6 or fewer unrelated persons. 18 or above, including a resident director, which provides special services in addition to room & board for individuals able to perform daily living activities with little or no assistance but desirin/requiring "protective. home-like environment because of physical, mental, familial or social circumstances." Council asserts increase in monthly rate-set at $150 per month ($170. including ;20 for personal needs) in 1972-is modest and overdue. Sufficient funds to cover increases are included in fiscal year 1975 and fiscal year 1976 budgets.
Action by City Council: Council approved Act 1-21 on second readin May 13. 1975. by an 11-0 vote, with two members absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: May 13.1975.
Approved by Mayor: July 7. 1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5, 1975 (legislative (lay 105*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 9, 1975.
Congresional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-28.
1-30 To REMOVE CITY COUNCIL FROMr COVERAGE OF 1968 ADMINfTITSTR_,TIVE PROCEDURE ACT: ESTABLISH A DISTRICT OF CornUIMA MUNIrPAL CODE AxN) STATUTES-AT-LARGE: SET PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCT OF
CONTESTED CASES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would amen(l lanlTa, re of 196; Administrative Procedures Act by eliminitiwr referees in its provisions to now-defunct District of Columbia Comncil and reassirninf' to Mayor responsibilities previously delegated hv measure to Comrnissioner and Council. Purpose is to remniove ambiguity concerning, application of Administrative Procedure Act to current City Council. leaving that elected body subject only to Home Rule Act and any self-imposed rules it might establish. Act 1-30 would in effect clarify existing Council's function as legislative agency of government rather






26

than administrative as was its predecessor. Title II of measure would further remove Council from Administrative Procedure Act coverage by repealing Section 7 (d) of the 1968 measure, which provided for creation of a District of Columbia Municipal Code, and substituting for it new language (Title II) to provide for compilation and publication of Municipal Code and Statutes-at-Large. Act would require Mayor's submission of proposed Code-Council acts in nature of municipal ordinances, District of Columbia government rules and regulations-t o Council by January 10, 1976, and Council approval by February 27, 1976; compilation and publication of Statutes-at-Laroe within 45 days of end of each Council year. Cost of bound copies of Code and regular publication of supplements estimated at $47,469 over a five-year period. Title III would set Council procedures for contested cases.
Action by City Council: Hearings held January 29, 1975, included testimony by eight witnesses; consensus reached as to need for estabIishing City Council identity as legislative agency, free from Administrative Procedure Act coverage. Council passed Act 1-30 on second reading June 20 by 11-0 vote, with two members absent.
Impact in Federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: June 20, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: July 10, 1975.
Received by Senate : July 23,1975 (legislative day 95*).
Referred to committee: July 26, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Oct. 7, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-19.

1-31 To ESTABLISHi DISTRICT oF, COLUMBIA BOXING AND WRESTLING
COMMISSION, AND TO PERMIT UNDERTAKERS LICENSED iFOR FrvE YEARS 1IT STATES NOT HAVING RECIPROCITY AGREEMENTS WITH1 THE isTRICT TO BE LICENSED IN DISTICT OF COLUMBIA WmouT TAKING
AN EXAMINATION
Effect of legislation: Legislation would create three-member commission with jurisdiction over all professional and amateur wrestling, boxing and martial arts events held in the District. Jurisdiction would extend to setting and enforcement of regulations governing such events; issuance of licenses and permits to hold/participate in them; collection of fees. Measure establishes fees equal to five percent of gross receipts realized for events conducted in the District, 10 percent of gross receipts for presentation of closed-circuit or subscription television broadcasts of events originating elsewhere. All Commission revenues in excess of $50,000 at end of fiscal year would revert to General Fund of District of Columbia. Bill would also allow undertakers licensed at least five years in states not having reciprocity agreements with District of Columbia to be licensed in the District without undergoing the examination otherwise required.
Action by City Counsel: Committee on Government Operations consulted chairman and secretary of present Boxing Commission and reviewed relevant regulations in New York, Maryland, Indiana and Ohio. Information regarding fiscal impact of bill solicited from






27

Mayor's office but not received. Council passed Act~ 1-31 on second reading by an 11-0 vote, in the absence of two members.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Coverage in Post and StarNews critical of undertakers' provision and its ramifications for Chairman Diggs. Letters from Mayor Washington quoted in Post story called provision's passage as amendment "objectionable on the grounds that the public is denied notice of the amendment and the opportunity to express its views."
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: June 17, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: July 11, 1975.
Received by Senate: July 23, 1975 (legislative day 95*).
Referred to committee: July 26, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Oct. 7, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-20.

1-33 To IMPLEMENT SECTION 738 OF HoM.E RULE ACT By DivIDING
DISTRICT INTO NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL AREAS AND PROVIDING MECIIANISM FOR ESTABLISHENIT OF ADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIMs
Effect of legislation: Legislation would set boundaries for Advisory Neighborhood Council areas and require Council to subdivide those areas into single-member districts, each of comparable size and including approximately 2,000 persons, by July 31, 1975; Council would then establish an ANC for area upon submission of petition signed by five percent of its registered voters. Election -of representatives for singlemember districts scheduled for February 3, 1976, subsequent elections to be held in November of 'Odd-numbered years together with those for Board of Education. Candidate for membership would be nominated by petition signed by 25 registered voters in his/her district. (Qualified candidate must be registered voter; reside in his district 60 days prior to filing; hold no other elected office in District of Columbia government or representing District.) Bill would limit campaign spending to $200, an individual's contribution to own campaign to $50, and exempt candidates from financial disclosure provisions of District of Columbia Campaign Finance Reform and Conflict of Interest Act. ANC member would be elected to two-year term, and could serve no more than two full terms consecutively. Estimated cost of separate ANC elections is $281,15-3.
Action by City Council: Council held hearings May 14, 1975, which included testimony from 37 witnesses, and passed bill on second reading June 24 by 12-0 vote (one member absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: June 24, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: July 22, 1975.
Received by Senate: July 25, 1975 (legislative day 97*).
Referred to committee: July 28, 1975'.
Congressional review period expir'ed: Oct. 9, 19750, District of Columbia Law 1-21.






28

1-34 To PROVIDE ADDITIONAL REVENUE FOR TILE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Effect of legislation: Legislation would raise District revenues by approximately $50.9 million via numerous changes in tax regulations and rates. Key measures include: eliminating the exclusion of professionals from unincorporated business tax; levying a one-year increase in corporate and unincorporated business income tax; increasing motor vehicle registration tax, fuel excise levies, cigarette tax, public utilities gross receipts tax; creating an 8 percent parking sales tax. Act 1-34 also would repeal the 2 percent food and drug sales tax, the 2 percent laundry and dry cleaning sales tax, and the 5 percent sales tax on utility bills. Of the new revenues, City Council estimates that approximately $33 million (65%) would be borne by District of Columbia businesses, the remaining $17.9 million by citizens.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Public attention focusing on provision which would remove professionals' exclusion from unincorporated business tax, drawing substantial media coverage; criticism of measure expressed strongly by various professional associations/organizations in District.
Impact on Federal interest in District: Measure may have unknown effect on city's tax base, which might affect District's need for Federal payment.
Adopted by Council : July 11. 1975.
Approved by Mayor: July 23, 1975.
Received by Senate: July 28, 1975 (legislative day 98*).
Referred to committee : July 29, 1975.
Concurrent resolution disapproving: July 30, 1975, H. Con. Res. 370 introduced by Mr. Harsha and referred to House District Committee.
Hearinas-Senate District Committee: Sept. 8-11, 1975 (printed) ; House District Committee, Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs: Sept. 17', 19, 1975.
House District Committee Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs approved (6-5) for Full Committee action. IT. Con. Res. 370: Sept. 19, 1975; Full House Committee disapproved (9-13) Sept. 26, 1975.
Senate concurrent resolution disapproving: Sept. 26, 1975, S. Con. Res. 67 introduced by Mr. Mathias and Mr. Beall and referred to Senate District Committee.
Congressional review period expired: Oct. 20, 1975. District of Columibia Law 1-23.
1-36 To ESTABLISH AN OFFICE ON AGING AND A COMMISSION O\ AGING IN THE DISTRICT
Effect of legislation: Legislation would create Office on Aging, responsible to Mayor, to administer Older Americans Act and other 1)rograms for aged in District. Office would be headed by executive director selected by Mayor, with advice and consent of City Council, from among three candidates recommended by Commission on Aging (see below). Director would serve as advocate of elderly and administer programs for them; provide information, technical assistance re. programs, services; prepare annual state plan required by O.A.A.; publish directory of services for aged; analyze impact of pro-





29

grans1)olieies on elderly prior to implementation. Siaty to be t least GS-15, step 1. Act 1-36 also would create Commission on Aging to advise District of Columbia government regard ijic views, 1e(0Is of District's aged; Commission to consist of 15 voting members, at least one-half of them actual consumers of services under aging program, including those of low-income, and minority persons at least in p)roportion to their numbers in District of Columbia population as a whole. Members, appointed by Mayor with Council approval, would serve three-year, unsalaried terms. Commission would: approve annual O.A.A. state plan prior to its submission to Mayor; recommend to Mayor candidates for post of Office on Aging director; submit annual report on needs of aged in District of Columbia; review and make recommendations on proposed District of Columbia and Federal legislation affecting elderly; conduct hearings on relevant matters; call attention to incidents of neglect, abuse, bias against aged in administration of District of Columbia laws.
Action by City Council: htearings were held and 'ayor's com'Mayor's~~~Ia sugesio com-atpror
ments solicited; Mayor's suggestion that prior approval of annual state plan for O.A.A. by Commission might be inappropriate was rejected by Council, which passed Act 1-36 on second reading by vote of 12-0 (one member absent).
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: July 1, 1975.
Approved by MNayor: July 25, 1975.
Received by Senate: Aug. 1, 1975 (legislative day 102*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 3, 1975.
CongressionAl review period expired: Oct. 28, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-24.
1-37 To EXEMtPT STEP-PARENT ADOPTION CASES FROM REQUIREMENT THlAT ADOPTION PETITION INCLUDE STATE-MENTS SPECIFYING RACE AND RELIGION
Effect of legislation: Legislation would amend District of Columbia Code to facilitate step-parent adoptions-in which petitioner is spouse of prospective adoptee's natural parent-by exempting them from requirement that petition include specified information on race and religion.
Action by City Council: Council adopted Act 1-37-the Step-Parent Adoption Facilitation Act--on second reading July 15, 1975, by a vote of 11-0 (two members absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed : None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: July 23,1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug. 4,1975.
Received by Senate: Aug. 11, 1975 (legislative day 103*). Referred to committee: Sept. 3,1975.
Congressional review period expired: Oct. 29, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-25.



79-825Z-76-----5






30

1-38 To ELIMINATE ETHNIC REFERENCES IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LAWS RELATING TO EDUCATION
Effect of legislation: Legislation would repeal provisions of the District of Columbia Code dealing with maintenance, administration and financing of separate schools for black children in the District (sec. 31-110; 31-115; 31-1110; 31-1111; 31-1112; 31-1113) and amend sec. 31-1109, authorizing the Board of Education to accept donations for betterment of such separate facilities by persons "disposed to aid in the elevation of the colored population," by deleting that description of donors' motivations.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed Act 1-38 on second reading July 15, 1975, by a vote of 11-0, in the absence of two members.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: July 15, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug. 4, 1975.
Received by Senate: Aug. 11,1975 (legislative day 103*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 3, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Oct. 29, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-26.
1-39 To CHANGE TIE NAME OF THE ADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS TO "ADvISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSIONS "
Effect of legislation: Legislation would amend Home Rule Act and District of Columbia Campaign Finance Reform and Conflict of Interest Act to delete references to "Advisory Neighborhood Councils" and substitute for them "Advisory Neighborhood Commissions."
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed Act 1-39 on second reading July 1, 1975, by a 9-0 vote (four members absent).
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: July 1, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug. 4, 1975.
Received by Senate: Aug. 11, 1975 (legislative day 103*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 3, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Oct. 29, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-27.
1-40 To EXPAND DISTRICT OF COLUMN ITA LAw REVISION COMMISSION
BY ADDITION OF FOUR MEMrBERS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would enlarge Law Revision Commission membership by authorizing appointment of three membersone a non-lawyer and one a law school faculty member-by City Council; one by director of District of Columbia Public Defender Service; one additional member by Joint Committee on Judicial Administration in the District of Columbia, (previously allotted two appointments). Measure also provides that, if incumnbent ap-






31

pointed by City Council Chairn:n satisfies aforementioned ,Literia he would continue serving and be counted as one of City Council's three appointees. As this is in fact the case, Act 1-40 would effect a net gain in Conmmnission nmemlbership of four peson:, b)rinlging its total size to nineteen. Bill's primary objective is to give ('City Council p)vwcr to select members equal to that of the Mayor; additionally, the ppointment allotted to Public Defender Service director would 1ba lance that afforded District of Columnbia Corporation Council by original Law Revision Conmmission legislation. City Council ('onunittee oni t lte Judiciary and Criminal Law estimates that fiscal impact would be limited to cost of extending authorized $100 per diem to four new members. Committee does not anticipate an apI weciable increase in staffing needs as result of Cominuission expansion.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council pa:,ed Act 1-40 on second reading by a vote of 11-0, in the absence of tvwo members.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on IFederal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council: July 15, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug. 8, 1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5, 1975 (legislative day 105*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 10, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975. District of Columbia Law 1-29.

1-142 To PROVIDE MORE EFFi(IErNT AND EFFECTIvE MEANS FR ( osLECTION OF TAXES FROM BANKS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS
AND PUBLIC UTILITIES
Elfect of legislation: Legislation would permit banking institutions. savings and loan associations, and public utilities, to declare estimated taxes and make payments toward them according to rules to 1.e promulgated by Mayor. Purpose is to provide more efficient method for collection of gross receipts/gross earnings ta..
Action by City Council: What Council describes as "mini-hearing" held July 11 and attended by representatives of banks, savings and loan associations and utilities. All favored the measure. Council passed Act 1-42-the District of Columbia Supplementary Revenue Ac(ton second reading July 29, by vote of 12-0 (one member absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council: July 29, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug. 13. 1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5, 1975 (legislative day 105*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 10, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-30.
1-43 To INCREASE PERMIISSIBLE SALARY ALLOWANCE FOR LOSE CONDUCTING UNINCORPORATED BUSINESSES IN DISTRICT
Effect of legislation: Legislation would increase from 20 percent to 55 percent the salary allowance permitted for purposes of deduction








for those covered by the uniincorporated business tax. Council rationale for change in allowance level is that measure would answer charges from various quarters alleging existing allowance, in light of removal of professionals' exclusion from unincorporated business tax, would produce "overtaxation" of professional sector, notably suburbanites affected. With allowance change, unincorporated business tax still is expected to yield approximately $8-million above previous year's $4.3million in revenues (when professionals were not included).
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-43-the District of Columbia Unincorporated Business Franchise Tax Revision Act of 1975-on second reading August 5, 1975, by an 11-0 vote (two members absent).
Impact on Federal interest in District: Unknown effect on city's tax base which might affect the District's need for Federal payment.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Interest in over-all issue of professionals' tax and in this modification of original legislation shown by media and by professionals' associations.
Adopted by Council: Aug. 5, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug 13, 1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5 1975 (legislative day 105*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 9, 1975.
Hearings: Senate Committee-Sept. 8-11, 1975 (printed).
S. Con. Res. 67 disapproving introduced by Senator Mathias: Sept. 26.1975.
Congressional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-31.

1-45 To EXTEND MINIMUM WAGE AND OVERTIME COMPENSATION
COVERAGE TO PRIVATE HoUSEHOLD WORKERS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would amend District of Columbia Minimum Wage Act to extend to domestic/household workers both its wage and overtime compensation coverage. Such workers would be guaranteed either a $2.50 per hour minimum or a rate to be specified by the Mayor via wage order, whichever is higher. Wage order-to be issued within 120 days of Act 1-4.5's effective date-would provide for payment of minimum wage and overtime, and set regulations to preclude circumvention of new rates and coverage. Public hearings on the wage order would be required.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Legislation was passed by Cmouncil on second reading by a vote of 12-0, with one member absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Council reports that Act 1-45 has strong support of National Council on Household Employment as well as D.C. Minimum Wage Board.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: July 29, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug. 15,1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5,1975 (legislative day 105*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 10, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-32.




03

1-46 To PROVIDE FOR RENT STABILIZATION PROGLxM IN DisTHiCT

Effect of legislation: Legislation would establish rent control programn and an agency-the Rental Accommodations Office, headed by a Rent Administrator-responsible for its administration. Would set ceiling on permissible rent levels, based on landlord's allowable rate of return (generally 8 percent maximum), and establish complex formula for determining rate of return for individual accommodations. Data would be provided by owners of rental accommodations in registration forms required to be filed with Office. Measure also sets forth procedures for appeal. hearings, hardship petitions, adjustment procedures related to rent levels so determined; regulations governing landlord-to-tenant notifications, rent increases, evictions, retaliatory action, penalties, et al.
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-46-the Rent tablilization Program Transition Act-July 29, 19,75. on second reading. by a vote of 9-3, in the absence of 1 member.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Much criticism of rent control concept, complexity of formulae for determining rates of return, volume of paperwork required, voiced by landlords' organizations and real estate management interest; support for measure expressed by tenants' organizations.
Adopted by Council: July 29, 1975.
Approved by Mayor Aug.15, 1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5. 1975 (legislative day 105*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 9, 1975.
IH. Con. Res. 399 disapproving introduced by Mr. Stuckey: S pt. 17 1975.
Hearing before House District Committee Subcommittee on Commerce. Housing, and Transportation: Oct. 1. 1975.
Full House Committee voted to table the resolution: Oct. 6.1975.
Congressional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-33.

1-48 To E fTxINATE )s1riarx.i "TrON Ao.x INP Parax.AxT CENTLY PREGNANT YOMEN IN A DMIN ISTRATION OF 1N EM P, LYMENT
TNhURAXCE BENEFITS
Effect of legislation: Lrislation woil d repowl law excludin:n pregnant women from unemployment benefits for six weeks before and after birth. It would provide that pregnancy should not createe any assumption of inability to work-the basis on which similar Maryland and Vir, inia laws were struck down in past 5 years-wIlil requiring pregnant or recently pregnant women to meet regular eligibilty s andards for benefits. Department of Labor customarily bears : mn nistrative costs of unemployment compensation program: n Department has twice lurQed states to repeal regulations dicriminatin snint prenant women (currently only 21 states retain such ],Iws). it will likely absorb cost increases occasioned by this measqire. (Case-v-ease analvsis to determine individual extent of disability is expected to raise costs in question ) District I7nemployment Comnensation Po ard estimates minimum cost of benefits for period from November 1, 197..






34

to end of fiscal year 1976 at $10,500, and, for fiscal 1977, at $18,000. No statistics regarding number of employers whose experience ratings might be affected were offered.
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-48 on second reading July 29, 1975, by vote of 12-0, in absence of one member.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Measure supported by Department of Labor, as noted above, and Commission on the Status of Women.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: July 29, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug. 15, 1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5, 1975 (legislative day 105*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 10, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975. District of Columbia Law 1-34.

1-49 To AMEND ACT 1-29-PROVIDING AN INCREASE IN MONTHLY
PAYMENT RATE FOR ADULT FOSTER HOME CARE-BY DELETING COVERAGE OF ALCOHOLIC/DRUG ADDICTION HALFWAY HOUSES; FURTHER
DEFINING ACCEPTABLE RECIPIENTS; OTHER
Effect of legislation: Legislation would amend Act 1-29, which raises to $2,00 the monthly payment to public assistance recipients for adult foster home care, by: (1) removing drug addiction/alcoholism halfway house residents from coverage, as their inclusion would require contract renegotiation at the present time; (2) clarifying language describing those eligible for such payments by specifying that they be recipients of "supplemental security income and general public assistance"; (3) deleting Council's definition of adult foster homes due to technical problems. Cost of amended bill through June 30, 1976, is estimated at approximately $1 million. Funds have been made available for period from January 1-June 30, 1975, in the amount of $355,482; balance is included in Mayor's 1976 budget request for Department of Human Resources.
Action by City Council: Council passed measure on second reading by a 12-0 vote, in absence of one member. It was neither approved nor disapproved by the Mayor in 10-day period following passage, and forwarded to Congress without his signature. (Act 1-49 was, however, introduced by Council Chairman Tucker at Mayor Washington's request.)
Congressional /public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Jully 29, 1975.
Enacted without Mayor's signature: Aug. 22, 1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5,1975 (legislative day 105*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 9, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-35.
1-50 To PROVIDE FOR ESTABLISHMENT, ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF A UNIVERSITY OF THiE DISTRICT or COLUMBIA
Effect of legislation: Legislation would consolidate public postsecondary educational institutions in the District of Columbia to








create single university governed by a Board of Trustees. Measure details Board membership's composition, qual ification requiirements. appointment procedures and responsibilities: latter includes longrange planning of university's development. policies. funding and operating procedures. Board is charged to establish within five years a comprehensive personnel system setting minimum standards for all matters relating to university employees: produce annual report on state of university: establish and maintain control over D.C. Postsecondary Education Fund. to consist of all funds other than tuition and Congressional grants contributed to university. Act 1-50 also authorizes Board of Education to transfer any appropriation balance from one appropriation item to another or to a new program. in amount not exceedingr 950.000.
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-50-the District of Columbia Public Post-secondary Education Reorganization Act Amendments-on scond reding July 2). 1975. by a 12-0 vote, in the absence of one member.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: July 29, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Aug. 25, 1975.
Received by Senate: Sept. 5, 1975 (legislative day 10,*).
Referred to committee: Sept. 9. 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Nov. 3, 1975. District of Columibia Law 1-36.

1-51 To PnoVIur: on POSTCARD REGISTRATION OF VOTERS
Effect of legislation: Liegislation would establish system of postcard registration for voters in the District of Columbia, to be administered by the District of Columbia. Board of Elections and Ethics according to procedures specified in measure. Act provides for distribution of registration applications, challenge procedures and recourse permitted applicant whose eligibility is challenged. It also increases maximum penalties for commission of fraud related to voting/registration from S500 to $I1000 in fines and from existing 90 days to as much as five years. Council cites studies by Ford Foundation. actual use of system in several states and ether sources which indicate major theoretical danger of postcard registration-potential vulnerability to fraud has not miiate rialized in practice elsewhere. Fiscal estimates vary: Board of Eletions and Ethics suggests probable total of 953.17.25. including $36.000 to pay 15 temporaries for four months' application card processing: Council's Committee on Government Operations di agrees with Board. alleging underestimate of Dostage and overestimate of pay (above). and, based on costs for similar systems in other areas as well a input from consultinrr ,nd printing firms, expects total cost ran rin from p45.690 up to $54.850.
Congressional /public interest expressed: ITeari gs hl Ma'4y 9, 20 and 21 included, in support of postcard registration, such witnesses as Richard Scnmmon: representatives of Common Cause, thOe Bar Association of the District of Columbia. Citizens Commission on Election Ethics for the District of Columbia. District of Columbia T.owneUe of






36

Women Voters, others. Two private citizens and the Chillum Heights Citizens Association opposed the act.
Action 'by City Council: After May hearings, Council passed the Voter Registration Act of 1975 on second reading by a vote of 12 to 1 (Hobson against).
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Sept. 9, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Oct. 6, 1975.
Received by Senate: Oct. 14, 1975 (legislative day 128*).
Referred to committee: Oct. 20, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Dec. 16, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-37.
1-52 To TRANSFER TO CITY COUNCIL AUTHORITY To DRAW ErLECrlION
WARD BOUNDARIES AND REALIGN CITY SERVICE DELIVERY AREAS To
CONFORM WITH NEW BOUNDARIES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would transfer to City Council from Board of Elections and Ethics authority to establish boundaries of the District of Columbia election wards. (Board would retain power to draw precinct lines within wards, subject to Council approval.) Measure provides for creation of eight contiguous wards approximately equal in population, and reapportionment following each decennial census. Mayor would develop plan for development of uniform, coterminus delivery system for city services, and service delivery areas would be adjusted to coincide with ward boundaries; effect would be to simplify now-varied geographical district systems used by different agencies and to improve accountability of government regarding services. Elimination of one service area in nine-area system extant (which does not cover all city services) would produce approximately $90,000 in savings. Further determination of fiscal impact depends upon details of Mayor's realignment plan.
Action by City Council: Council held hearings May 7-8, and passed A ct 1-52-the Boundaries Act of 1975--on second reading by a vote of 13-0.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Supporting bill at hearings were representatives of Woodley Park Community Assn.; Capitol East Voter Information Leag ue:; Kalorama Citizens Assn.: Southwest House Board; District of Columbia League of Women Voters and others. Opposed were Citizens Commission on Election Ethics for the District of Columbia, and Neighbors United to Save Our Homes. Others testified/submitted statements against specific boundary changes no longer included in the Act.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Sept. 9. 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Oct. 6, 1975.
Received by Senate: Oct. 14, 1975 (legislative day 128*).
Referred to committee: Oct. 20, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Dec. 16, 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-38.






37

1-54 To ESTABLISH COMM-ITNY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. IN DISTRICT OF COL U3rBIA
Effect of legislation: Legislation would provide requisite statutory authority to enable the District to participate fully in a Community Development Program under the 1974 H1ousing and Coninunity Development Act. Title I of 1974 measure consolidated previously categorical programs-Urban Renewal. Open Space, et al.-and 1in insitIted block grant system for funding. Presently. District of Colunmbia can perform all activities eligible for assistance under Community Development Program outlined in Title IL but only for geographic areas of city specified in the various urban renewal plans, and can continue certain activities previously funded by Model Cities grants. Act 1-,)4 would allow Communty Development Programn activities to be earried out on city-wide basis, after approval of a community development plan. Measure directs Mayor to develop and hold public hearings on such plan which, following its passage by City Council, would be submitted to HUD for approval. It also empowers Mayor to administer resultant community development program: acquire real property in its interest: establish and administer low-intereit Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Fund and Rehabilitation Loan Insurance Fund. Act would not produce major fiscal impact on I)istri't of Columbia, as administrative and program activities would be funded largely through federally-a-sisted grants.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held, due to coverage of housing needs in hearing on FY '70 budget. Mayor's Reo; :aanization Plan No. 3 (establishing a Department of Housing and Community Development), Community Block Grant Application of 1975, all held previously. Council passed Act 1-54 on second reading by an 11-0 vote, two members absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None. Adopted by Council: Sept. 9, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Oct. 9, 1975.
Received by Senate: Oct. 17.,1975 (legislative day 128*).
Referred to committee: Oct. 20, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Dec. 16. 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-39.
1-56 To EXTEND DISTnRICT'S CURRENT MORATORIUT31 ON"
C;NoDOIINwIrM CONVERSIONS TO APRIL 30, 1976
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend current moratorium on condominium conversions-previously scheduled to expire I eember 31-to April 30. 1976. Council has recently begun to coinsiQer two pieces of comprehensive condominium legislation as well as two major studies of the national and local impact of conversions, all received in September: hliearings on former are to be held in November. and C'ouncil feels thorough evaluation of all aforementioned materials will require more time than original December deadline would allow. Certainly. no new legislation to regulate condominiums could be en:nted by that date. Extension would produce no fiscal effect.






38
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-56-the Second Horizontal Property Regie Reglation Extension Act-on second reading October 21 by a vote of 10-0, in the absence of three members.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council:Oct. 21, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Oct. 22, 1975.
Received by Senate: Oct. 23, 1975 (legislative day 131*).
Referred to committee: Oct. 28, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Dec. 19, 1975, District of Cohimbia Law 1-40.
1-57 To AUTHORIZE ISSUANCE OF $50,000,000.00 IN GENERAL
OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Effect, of legislation: Legislation would authorize issuance of $50 million in General Obligation bonds to refinance identical amount in 1975 loans made to District of Columbia by U.S. Treasury. Maximum interest rate would be set at eight percent, maximum allowable maturity for bonds at 30 years and ceiling for maximum debt service at $5:200,000. Measure also creates sinking fund-to contain revenues from special tax authorized in Act 1-57, and additional revenuesfor payment of interest, principal and premium. Aforementioned special tax would be levied annually on taxable real property in District in amount sufficient to pay principal, interest and premium; no specific rate is set in bill. Act authorizes Mayor to market and pubIish all notices regarding sale of bonds, subject to Council approval. Legislation is aimed at refinancing two 1975 Treasury loans to District of Columbia totaling $50 million, borrowed at eight percent interest rate. Annual debt service is $4,441,372. If bonds were sold at seven percent, District would save $400,000-plus per year; at 6.5 percent, more than $600,000; at six percent, more than $800,000. (Total principal now owed Treasury by District of Columbia is approximately one billion dollars. Annual debt srv ice for fiscal year 1976 is about $65 million and, for fiscal year 1977, a projected $84 million. Council attributes growth of debt to expanding public works program.)
Action by City Council: Bond issue planned in consultation with professional bond counselors and the First Boston Corporation. Council passed Act 1-57-the Refunding Bond Authorization Act-on second reading by a 12-0 vote (one member absent).
Adopted by Council: Oct. 21, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Oct. 22, 1975.
Received by Senate: Oct. 24, 1975 (legislative day 132*).
Referred to committee: Oct. 28, 1975.
S. Con. Res. 78 disapproving introduced by Mr. Eagleton, with all committee members cosigning: Nov. 20, 1975.
Hearing on S. Con. Res. 78 and D.C. fiscal affairs: Dec. 2, 1975. (Printed.)
S. Con. Res. 78 considered and ordered reported favorably to Senate by a vote of 7-0: Dec. 3, 1975.
Reported favorably to Senate (S. Con. Res. 78) without amendment (S. iRept. ,94-507) : Dec. 4, 1975.
Resolution considered by Senate : Dec. 5-6, 1975.






39

Resolution passed by Senate, without amendment. by a rollcall vote of 80-3: Dec. 6, 1975.
S. Con. Res. 78 referred to House District Committee: Dec. 8, 1975.
Oversight hearing on act 1-57 by Ioume Committee: Dec. 9, 1975.
House District Committee considered S. Con. Res. 78 and disapproved by a vote of 19-1: Dec. 11. 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Dec. 20. 1975, District of Columbia Law 1-41.

1-.59 To REMOVE, REQUIREMENT TI AT TIHE DISTRICT OF COLIMBIA
RE~TNUES BE COLLECTED INTO AND EXPEND-r)E F Or VARmIos SPECTAL FUNDS, AND TO SUBSTITUTE FOR SPECIFIC FUNDS A GENERAL
FUND
Effect of legislation: Legislation would replace various special funds, currently used for collection and expenditure of District monies in certain budget areas. with single General Fund consisting of revenues from taxes, fees, charges, federal payments, loans. Funds to be abolished are: Highway: Motor Vehicle Parking: Metrobus: Water: Sanitary Sewage Works: Alcoholic Rehabilitation. Those not specified, including RFK Stadium bonds, are not affected. Measure would permit Council to create special accounts within the General Fund for reporting purposes, without limiting transfer of funds among them, and establishes three such accounts immediately, pertaining to: water service and operation of Washington Aqueduct: sewer service, including the District of Columbia costs for Potomac interceptor; highway facilities, traffic control and public transportation. Purpose of Act 1-59 is to simplify and increase flexibility of management to city funds. No fiscal impact is expected. other than possible savings in accounting and management costs and in opportunity for additional investment earnings via pooling larger sums of idle funds.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council approved Act 1-59-the Revenue Funds Availability Act of 1975---on second reading October 7 by a -vote of 12-0. in absence of one member.
Congressional/public interest expressed : None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Oct. 7. 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Oct. 24. 1975.
Received by Senate: Nov. 3, 1975 (legislative day 135*).
Referred to committee: Nov. 4. 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Jan. 22. 1976. D.C. Law 1-42.
1-61 To PROVDmE THAT PROFESSIONALT CORPORATIONS BE TREATED AS
UNINCORPORATED BUSINESSES FOR TAX PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would provide that professional cornorntions in District be treated as unincorporated businesses for purpose of imposition of franchise tax: be permitted whatever exemption may be allowed unincorporated businesses (current level: p5000) : and be subject to 20 percent-of-net-income limit on aggregate deduction for services rendered professional corporation, for compensation. I)y a stockholder. According to Council Committee on Finance and Revenue, objective is to close "loophole which would enable profes-




40

sionals to avoid the unincorporated business franchise tax by incorporating and paying out all (or nearly all) their net income in the owners' or partners' salaries." District of Columbia Director of Finan(-e & Revenue Kenneth Back estimates legislation would prevent possible loss of $7.4 million in revenues to be realized by unincorporated business tax. Effective date: January 1, 1975.
Action by City Council: Public roundtable discussion held September 22, attended by representatives of District of Columbia Bar; District of Columbia Dental Society; Bar Association of District of Columbia; District of Columbia Institute of CPAs; Medical Society of District of Columbia; Board of Trade, others. Council passed Act 1-61-the District of Columbia Professional Corporation Revision Act-on second reading by vote of 11-2. Opposed were Council members Clarke ard Douglas Moore; latter submitted statement of dissent, citing legislation's potential for causing higher taxes on professional corporations than are levied on simple business corporations, among other reasons, for vote against.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Original legislation to tax professionals provoked controversy, press coverage, hearings; Act 1-61 has attracted no such heated interest.
Impact on Federal interest in District : None.
Adopted by Council: Oct. 7, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Oct. 29, 1975.
Received by Senate: Nov. 3, 1975 (legislative day 135*).
Referred to committee: Nov. 4, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Jan. 22. 1976; D.C. Law 1-43.

1-62 To REPEAL UNINCORPORATED BusINESS FRANCHISE TAX REVISION ACT, AND TO AMEND EXTANT UNINCORPORATED BUsINEss FRANCHISE TAX'S SALARY ALLOWANCE AND STANDARD EXEMPTION
PROVISIONS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would establish salary allowance of 70 percent for professionals and other "personal service" businesses, with a standard exemption of $2,500. For "capital intensive" businesses, a salary allowance of 30 percent would be established, with a standard exemption of $5,000.Objective is to raise amount of net income excluded from franchise tax, as net tax on professional and personal service businesses is heavier, as percentage of gross income, than that on capital intensive firms. Unincorporated business franchise tax. as amended by the Revenue Act of 1975 (Act 1-34) and Act 1-62, would yield approximately $8 million in additional revenues for the District. (Revenue Act of 1975 proposed to remove exclusion of professional and personal service businesses from unincorporated business franchise tax adopted in 1917, retainingr 20 percent salary allowance and $5.000 exemption level for all unircororated businesses. The Unincorporated Business Franchise Tax Pevision Act of 1075. pqcsed one month -after the Revenue Act, would have increased salary allowance for P11 unincorporated businesses from 20 percent to 55 percent. Act 1-62 further revises the tax design via above-mentioned changes.)
Action by City Council: Public hearing October 1 was attended by representatives of the District of Columbia Bar, Optometric Society,






41

League of Women Voters, Podiatric Society, District of Columbia Institute of CPAs, District of Columbia Medical Society and Bar Assn. of the District of Columbia. Council passed Act 1-62 October 21 oi c0(0 lyl'8( bY 1 2- vote ( OP 1111 )P e aset ).
Congressional/public interest expressed: Hearings held September 8-10 by Senate District Committee and September 17 and 19 by House i)-trict ( on ttee focusedl on tihe two initial ('on :il acts dealing with taxation of professionals. Witnesses of the several professional organizations represented at CounciFl's October 1 hearing testiied i favor of moderating tax provisions as in Act 1-(2.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Oct. 21, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Nov. 5, 1975.
Received by Senate: Nov. 11, 1975 (legislative day 140*).
Referred to committee: Nov. 12. 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Feb. 2, 1976. D.C. Law 1-44.
1-64 To PROVIDE DIRECT ACCESS TO CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGISTS AND
OPTOMETRISTS IN PRIVATE HEALTH PLANS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would require that private health/ accident insurance policyholder be permitted direct access to duly licensed psychologists and optometrists without prior referral by physicians. Measure is consistent with Public Law -3. which imposes same requirement on Civil Service Commission contracts with health insurance carriers providing federal employees' health benefits programs. Act 1-64 would not expand benefits to which policyholder is entitled, but only eliminate prior referral requirements. The bill will not have any fiscal impact for the District.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held; Council solicited comments on measure from representatives of medical, insurance and optometric communities, and received favorable reports from all but the Washington Psychiatric Society. Council passed Act 1-64 (the Access to Psychologistsand Optometrists Act) on second reading October 21 by a 12-0 vote (one member absent).
Con gressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District:None.
Adopted by Council: Oct. 21. 1975.
Approvd by Mayor: Nov. 7, 1975.
Received by Senate: Nov. 20, 1975 (legislative day 147*).
Referred to committee :Dec. 1, 1975.
Conrressional review period expired: Feb. 19, 1976, D.C. Law 1-46.
1-65 To ELIMIMINATE REQUIREMENT THAT SAMPLE BALLOTS BE PuBLISTIED PRIOR TO ELECTInNS WITH REGARD TO ADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COM TISSION CONTESTS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would render inapplicable, with regard to Advisory Neighborhood Commission elections only. 1955 District of Columbia Election Act provision mandating publication of sample hallots prior to any election administered by Board of Elections and Ethics. Board proposed change due to fact that ANC elections will involve approximately 370 ballots: anticipated cost of printing samples in one or more newspapers of general circulation,






42

as required by 1955 statute, would 'be $159,000. As nature of ANC contests is fundamentally local, Board feels use of community newsp apers, broadcast media public service time, posters and mass-rnailincy of information pamphlets would be both more to the point anc,7 economical.
City Council action: Council passed Act 1-65-the Publication of Sample, Ballots Act of 1975-on second reading by a vote of 12-0, in
-the absence of one member. No hearings were held.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in TDistrict: None.
Adopted by Council: Oct. 21, 1975.
Approved by Mayor : Nov. 7, 1975.
Received by Senate: Nov. 17, 1975 (legislative day 144*).
Referred to committee: Nov. 18, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Feb. 6, 19 76, D.C. Law 1-45.

1-67 To PERMIT DISTrRICT OF, COL~UMBIA EDUCATIONAL SYSTEi 's
CLASS 15 TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES To BE ELIGIBLE FOR ADDITIONAL
ADVANCED LEAVE WITH PAY
Effect of legislation: Legislation would authorize Superintendent of Schools to advance additional leave, with pay, to temporary teachers and attendance officers in the event of serious disability or emergency. (Such leave would not exceed maximum amount which teacher/officer would otherwise earn during his/her period o-f appointment.) Like coverage already is available to permanent and probationary school system employees of that salary class. Board of Education asserts legislation would not affect either total amount of leave 110w being taken or amount of payment for that leave time; District of Columbia Office of Budget and Management Systems concurs, feeling no fiscal impact should be anticipated. Board approved proposal as one which would eliminate necessary discrimination among employees of same salary class, all of whom are equally susceptible to serious ailments and personal emergencies. (Note: Class 15 temporary employees are those in the process of earning accreditation for probationary status in the system.)
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed Act 1-67-the Advanced Additional Leave Act-on second readingrz October 21 by a vote of 12-0 (one member absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District : None.
Adopted by Council: Oct. 21, 1975.
Approved by Mayor : Nov. 13, 1975.
Received by Senate : Nov. 20, 1975 (legislative day 147*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 1, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Feb. 19, 1976, D.C. Law 1-4 7.

1-68 To REGULATE SECURITY DEPOSITS FOR RENTED DWELLINGS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would repeal City Council Act 1-10, which set reuain ocrigscrity deposits, and substitute essentially similar provisions in new language. Three substantive changes were made. Original measure required landlords to place security deposits in interest-bearing escrow accounts; new bill specifies that those accounts be held in financial institutions in District, and






43

permits per annum simple interest rather than quarterly compltation previously required. Earlier act also made owners inspection of dwelling within three days before/after termination of tenancy to determine condition of accommodations mandatory, and required tenant to provide written notice to landlord of any desire to be present at such inspection; new legislation removes both requirements. Thei bill is not expected to have any fiscal impact on the D)istrict government.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed Act' 1-68--the Seur ity D)eposit Act-Oc.tober 21. 1975. by a vote of 10-0. in the absence of three members.
Congressional /public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council : Oct. 21. 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Nov. 14, 1975.
Received by Senate: Nov. 24, 1975 (legislative day 148*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 5, 19 75.
Congressional review period expired.: Feb. 20. 1976, D.C. Law 1-48.

1-69 To ISSUE SPECIAL AUTO LICENSE TAGS AND REGISTRATION
CERTIFICATES FOR MEMBERS OF TIE D.A.V.
Effect of legislation: Legislation would provide for issuance of license tags bearing initials "D.A.V." and special registration certificates to bona fide members of District of Columbia Disabled American Veterans. No individual would be permitted to register more than one vehicle under this act; fees would be set at levels identical to those for regular passenger motor vehicles. Fiscal impact estimated at $200 cost of initial plate and dies necessary to print the tags.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed Act 1-69-the D.A.V. Motor Vehicle Registration Certificate and Identification Tag Act-by a 13-0 vote November 4. 1975.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District : None.
Adopted by Council: Nov. 4, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Nov. 20, 1975.
Received by Senate: Dec. 1, 1975 (legislative day 148*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 5.1975.
Congressional review period expired: Feb. 20, 1976. D.C. Law 1-49.

1-70 To EXEMPT ALLRTIAL ARTS FROM JURISDICTION OF DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA BOXING AND WRESTLING COMMIISSION ANI) TO REPEAL MEASURE PERMITTING LICENSING OF UNDERSTANDING IN DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA WITIIOUT EXAMINATIONS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would strike provision of previous City Council act which would have allowed licensing in District of Columbia, without examination, of undertakers licensed elsewhere. It would also remove martial arts from coverage of the District of Columbia Boxing and Wrestling Commission Act, which created a commission and regulations to govern various forms of athletic conpetition. Council assumes that repealing licensing law will produce some savings in administrative costs; fiscal impact of martial arts provision is unknown.






44

Action by City Council: Council Committee on Government Operations heard testimony from Jhoon Rhee of the Committee to Organize the World Blackbelt League and others in support of exempting martial arts from regulation, and from District of Columbia Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers and other members of public regarding licensing of undertakers. Council passed Act 1-70 (District of Columbia Boxing and Wrestling Commission Act Amendment Act) Nov. 4 by a 13-0 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed: District of Columbia Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers requested repeal of undertakers' licensing provision following numerous inquiries from prospective licensees and out-of-state media; Board cited fiscal implications for District of Columbia undertakers already licensed, fact that they would be subject to more stringent licensing requirements than non-District residents and threatened termination of existing courtesy card agreements between District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia. Much media attention was drawn by original legislation. Regarding martial arts, Mr. Rhee and others expressed concern to Council as noted above.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Nov. 4, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Nov. 20, 1975.
Received by Senate: Dec. 3, 1975 (legislative day 150*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 5, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Feb. 25, 1976, D.C. Law 1-50.

1-71 To AUTHORIZE DISTRICT To ENTER INTO TIIE INTERSTATE
PAROLE AND PROBATION COMPACT
Effect of legislation: Legislation would allow District of Columbia to join Interstate Parole and Probation Compact, in which all fifty states are members and District of Columbia currently operating within its confines on courtesy basis. Compact permits parolees and probationers to reside in other states if they or their families are residents there and employment can be obtained, and if receiving state is willing to accept their residence; receiving states then assume responsibility for visitation and supervision. As District already operate- within Compact's cidelines, measure would involve neither procedural chances nor additional costs; it would, however, allow District of Columbia voting membership in Compact and provide formal statutory authority for actions taken under the Compact.
Action by City Council: Roundtable discussion held July 16, 1975. Comments in support of legislation received from Deputy Secretary of Md. Dept. of Public Safety and Correctional Services; Chief Judge Greene of D.C. Superior Court: Judge Belson of District of Columbia Superior Court. Council passed Act 1-71-the Interstate Parole and Probation Compact Act-on second reading November 18, 1975, by a 12-0 vote, in absence of one member.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council :Nov. 18, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Dec. 4. 1975.
Received by Senate: Dec. 15.1975 (legislative day 157*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 17, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Mar. 11, 1976. D.C. Law 1-51.






45

1-72 To EXTEND EADLINE FOR APPEALING PROPEI'rY TAX
ASSESSMENTS TO SUPERIOR COURT
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend deladlinle for appealing property tax assessments to Tax Division of Superior Colirt from October 15 to April 1 of following year (latter date having )e,,n deadline until 1974). Although October 15 d(late is only 15 days a f't 1 first half taxes are due and six months prior to second half due (date. recent rulings have required that entire tax subject to appeal must be paid in advance before appeal may be accepted vby Superior ('ourt. Proposed measure would restore April 1 deadline, whicll had beel changed by 1974 District of Columbia Real Property Tax Revisionlt Act (Public Law 93-407). and thus correct substantial har(lshipl created by October 15 date for both large and small taxpayers. Taxpayer would thereby be permitted to pay first and second half (September and March) taxes in normal manner and file appeal with Superior Court by April 1. Anticipated fiscal impact on District of Columbia government would be negligible: amount of funds generally involved is approximately $100,000 or less. and interest to be gained at 7 percent in area of $.3,5)00 for six-month period.
Action by City Council: Council passed similar measure as em(ergency legislation October 7, 1975. Act 1-72-the Real Propertv Tax
Pec leg isions ct of 19" ,ib
Appellate Provisions Act of 1975-was passed on second reading Ly Council November 18 by 12-0 vote. in absence of one member.
Congressional /public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council: Nov. 18.1975.
Approved by Mayor: Dec. 4. 1975.
Received by Senate: Dec. 15, 1975 (legislative day 157*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 17. 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Mar. 11, 1976, D.C. Law 1-52..

1-73 To ALLOW ADMINISTRATIVE !SUPERVISORY SCHOOL OFFICERS
Wiro ARE GRANTED SABB CAL LEAVE To RECEIVE 1 P TO ONE-HALF
THEIR SALARIES DURING Sucii LEAVE
Effect of legislation: Legislation would authorize payment to administrative or supervisory school officers of up to one-half their regular salaries while on sabbatical leave, a payment level already permitted teachers in such circumstances. Sabbatical leave is available e only to permanent school system employees with six years' service, on approval of both Superintendent and Board of Eduation: proof of acceptance into graduate school and planned course of study are required; number of employees on leave is limited to one-percent of total District of Columbia educational staff. FY '76 budget allotment for sabbatical pay totals $350.000: there is no indication in bill or Council reports that amount would Ie increased. Board of EdI(ation indicates legislation would not impose any mandatory increase in its allotment of funds for sabbatical compensation grants. and higher payments may simply cause reduction in number of employees granted leave. Board approved similar proposal February 19. 1975.
Action by City Council: Council approved Act 1-73-the School Officers' Sabbatical Leave Act-on second reading November 18. 1975,. by a 12-0 vote (one member absent).






46

Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in the District: None.
Adopted by Council: Nov. 18, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Dec. 4, 1975.
Received by Senate: Dec. 15, 1975 (legislative day 157*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 17, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Mar. 11, 1976, D.C. Law 1-53.

1-74 To PERM.-IT CONTINUED 1 PERCENT LimiT ON SULFUR CONTENT IN COAL AND FUEL OILS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would allow sale and use of coal and fuel oils containing up to 1 percent by -weight in District until July 1, 19 78. 1972 Air Quality Control Regulations had provided that acceptable sulf ur level be reduced from 1 percent to 0.05 percent as of Jul-y, 1.975, on assumption that reduction would be necessary if District of Columbia were to meet federally mandated air quality standard for sulfur dioxide. Current studies show that District has been meeting those standards -while maintaining the 1 percent permissible level, however, and a, change to the 0.05 percent limit would pose high expense for modification of existing storage and delivery facilities as well as in cost of higher-grade fuels. Estimates place savings to District of Columbia government and residents at approximately $9.4 million if 1 percent standard is retained. (Maryland and Virginia are keeping 1 percent limit as well.)
Action by City Council: Public hearing was held July 3, 1975. Testifying In support of the proposed legislation were representatives of the District of Columbia Department of Environmental Services; Steuart Petroleum; Pepco; the Oil Heat Association of Greater Washington. Opposed were representatives of the National Capital Interstate Air Quality Planning Committee and the Metropolitan Washington Coalition for Clean Air. Council passed Act 1-74-the Air Quality Amendment No. II Relating to the Sulfur Content of Fuelson second reading November 18 by a vote of 12-0 (one member absent).
Con gressi onal/public interest expressed: See above.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Nov. 18, 1975'.
Approved by Mayor: Dec. 5, 1975.
Received by Senate: Dec. 15, 1975 (legislative day 157*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 17, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Mfar. 11, 1976, D.C. Law 1-54.

1-75' To INCREASE TAXI LIrABILITY INSURANCE RATES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would authorize 20 percent increase in rates charged taxicabs for liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage. hiking yearly premium for liability insurance from $396.00 to $4715.80; two weeks' premium for such coverage from $15.25 to $18.30; two weeks' premium extraterritorial excess limits from $0.75' to $0.90. Increase is designed to cover inflation from July, 1,974, through October, 1976; auto repair and medical care costs, main components of auto insurance claims, have risen approximately 20 percent in recent years. Measure poses no fiscal impact on District government.






47

Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed Act 1-75--the Taxicab Insurance Premium Act of 19735--on second reading December 2 by a vote of 10-0, in the absence of three members.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None. Adopted by Council: Dec. 2, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Dec. 15, 1975. Received by Senate: Dec. 18, 1973 (legislative day 160*).
Referred to committee: Dec. 19, 1975.
Congressional review period expired: Mar. 17, 1976, D.C. Law 1-56.

1-81 To PROVIDE RELIEF FOR SOUTHEAST PROPERTY OWNERS IN ATEL
SEVERELY AFFECTED BY SOIL EROSION
Effect of legislation: Legislation would authorize Mayor to undertake permanent improvements necessary to prevent further deterioration by soil erosion of properties in Square S-5542 of District. Propertv owners would be assessed for fair share of costs at rate determined by Mayor; they could defer payment for maximum period of 10 years, with interest on unpaid balance not to exceed seven percent. Measure also directs Mayor to submit to Council within one year a report on similar conditions elsewhere in District. Fiscal aspects uncertain. pending Mayor's determination of remedies required in Square S-5542 and study of needs in other areas.
Action by City Council: Council's Committee on Transportation and Environmental Affairs visited five sites suffering erosion-sedimentation control problems and found situation in Square S-5542 critical. Public hearing held April 29, 1975, at which no opposition to measure was expressed. Council passed Act 1-81-the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act of 1975--on second reading December 2 by a vote of 9-0 (four members absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed: Concern over conditions voiced at hearings by residents of Square S-5542 (Southeast area bounded by O Street, Branch Avenue, Highwood Drive and Carpenter Street) and other areas.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Dec. 2. 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Dec. 23, 1975.
Received by Senate: Jan. 5, 1976 (legislative day 162*).
Referred to committee: Jan. 20,1976.
Congressional review period expired: Mar. 19, 1976, D.C. Law 1-55.

1-83 To ExTEN-D THIE TIMrE WITHIN WHICH THE COUNCIL OF THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MUST ACT To EsTABLISIi TAX INCENTIVES FOR TuE REHABILITATION OF REAL PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ACCORDING TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REAL PROPERTY TAX
REvISION ACT OF 1974
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend to September 3, 1976. Council's deadline for enacting regulations providing tax incentives for rehabilitation of real property and new construction. Original deadline, designated in 1974 Real Property Tax Revision Act. was September 3. 1975; subsequent emergency legislation pushed date up to December 2. 1975. Council requires further extension to develop its tax incentive program.






48

Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-83-the Tax Incentive Time Extension Act-on second reading December 16, 1975, by a 13-0( vote.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
(Congressionali/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: Dec. 16.1975.
Approved by Mayor: Jan. 7,1976.
Received by Senate: Jan. 23, 1976 (legislative day 166*).
Referred to committee: Jan. 26.1976.
Congressional review period expired: Mar. 29, 1976, D.C. Law 1-57.

1-84 To AMEND THiE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA EMPLOYEE NON-LIABILITY
ACT To PROVIDE FOR THE INDE3MNIFICATION OF MEDICAL EMPLOYEES
IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would indemnify the District of Columbia government's medical employees, to the extent that they are not covered by insurance, against payment of money damages arising from acts/omissions occurring within scope of their employment. As the District of Columbia Corporation Counsel already reprey sents District's employees who are sued for such reasons and the District of Columbia government is almost invariably named as codefendant in civil suits brought against its employees, bill is intended to cover rare possibility that a medical employee might be named as sole defendant in a malpractice suit. (To date. there has been only one instance of this: as result. Council expects fiscal impact of Act 1-84 to be minimal.) Measure came about at urging of D.C. General Hospital staff, due to fact that District does not pay for medical malpractice insurance for its medical personnel. Council Committee on Judiciary and Criminal Law report on bill recommends exploration of the possibility of purchasing such insurance in future.
Action by City Council: Roundtable discussion held November 6. 1975. attended by representatives of local bar. D.C. Medical Society, D.C. General Hospital staff assn. Council passed Act 1-84--the Medical Employee Protection Act of 1975-on second reading December 16, 19'5. by a vote of 12--0 (one member absent).
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Congressional /public interest expressed: (See above.)
Adopted by Council : Dec. 16. 1975.
Approved b Mayor: Jan. 9.1 976.
Received b- Senate: Jan. 23.1976 (legislative day 166*).
Referred to committee : Jan. 23.1976.
Congressional review period expired: Mar. 29, 1976, D.C. Law 1-59.

1-85 To ESTABLISII TIjE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF ADVISORY
NEIGHBORHOOD Co.MISSIONS: THEIR INTERNAL OPERATING STRU(CTURE: THEIR R-ELATIONSHIPSI TO OTIER GOVERNMENTAL AND PRIVATE
ENTITIES; AND THEIR FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would define further the duties and responsibilities of Advisory Neighborhood Commissions: their internal structure and operations, relationships with other government and






49

private agencies, and fiscal and administrative procedures. Measure would prohibit Commissions from initiating legal action in I)istret of Columbia or Federal courts, while peinittin g petitioning Council if it is felt legal redress is required; allow Commissions to operate programs other than neighborhood/community enhancement campaigns only in conjunction with existing governmental activities and then not on contractual basis with such agencies. It would also prohibit Commissions from soliciting or accepting funds from government agencies or private sources except as Council authorizes; receipt of $100-or-less contribution from single contributor, however, need not be approved by Council. Commissions would not be permitted to incorporate.
Action by City Council: Hearings were held October 29, 1975. with approximately 45 witnesses presenting testimony. Council passed Act 1-85-the Duties and Responsibilities of Advisory Neighborhood Commissions Act of 1975-December 16 by a 13-0 vote on second reading.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Dec. 16, 1975.
Approved by Mayor: .Jan. 9. 1,976.
Received by Senate: Jan. 23. 1976 (legislative day 166*).
Referred to committee: JTan. 26, 19176.
Congressional review period expired: Mar. 29, 1976, D.C. Law 1-58.

1-S7 To INSURE TIE FURTHEln DEVELOPMENT AND SPECIFICATION OF
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EM PLOYMENT PLANS BY ALL DISTRICT GovERNMENT AGENCIES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would require submission by each agency of District of Columbia government an annual affirmative action plan containing the following information: numerical breakdown-by categories of rihale-female, black, white, Spanish-speaking, native American and Asian American--of its employees if those groups were represented in proportion to their numbers in the "available work force" of the District ("available work force"= all District of Columbia residents between the ages of 18 and 65)*: the agency's actual employment levels for the aforementioned categories: its projected number of hires and promotions for the following year, also by category, and similar figures for hires, promotions and terminations during the previous year. Also included would be a statement of agency actions to assure equal opportunity to those groups specified above, as well as to the aging, young, handicapped, and homosexual. The Mfayor would be directed to detail equal opportunity officers and specialists employed by all District of Columbia agencies, other than fire department, to the Office of Hmnnian Rights. with appropriate budgetary transfers for fiscal year 1977. Council committee report anticipates no fiscal impact.
Action by City Council: Council overruled Mayoral veto of measure January 19 1976, by a 12-0 vote in the absence of one member. The
Act states that such projections would be the "goals, not quotas, of the plan."






50

Mayor's objections centered on use of the District of Columbia's total population aged 18-65 as standard for employment goals, which he felt might produce unreasonable expectations in applicants/deliberate decisions to hire less qualified personnel, thus risking the metamorphosis of goals into quotas. He also suggested language reaffirming agency's allegiance to merit system. Civil Service Commission opinion re "available work force" standards concurred with Washington's. Act was forwarded to President after overrule, and Ford did not choose to sustain the Mayor's veto.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: Dec. 2, 1975.
Vetoed by Mayor: Dec. 24, 1975.
Reenacted by Council: Jan. 19, 1976.
Approved by President: Feb. 27,1976.
Received by Senate: Mar. 3, 1976 (legislative day 184*).
Referred to committee : Mar. 4, 1976.
Resolution of disapprovel introduced by Mr. Collins of Texas (H. Con. Res. 579) : Mar. 9, 1976.
House committee considered T. Con. Res. 579 but took no action: Apr. 27, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: May 5, 1976, D.C. Law 1-63.
1-89 To PROVIDE FOR THE SErIANNUAL SAFETY INSPECTION OF ALL
BUSES REGISTERED IN THE DISTRCcT OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would require semiannual safety inspections for public passenger vehicles for hire having capacity of eight or more passengers (excluding driver). Vehicles covered by the measure would include: school, sightseeing, and metrobuses, funeral cars, taxicabs, and ambulances for hire. Excluded would be: commercial and rental vehicles, hearses, and prorated interstate buses. Taxis and schoolbuses already are inspected on semiannual basis; the District of Columbia Department of Transportation advises that increased inspection schedule for metrobuses would require hiring of two additional inspectors at, total cost of $21.800 per annum ($6,500 of that sum is included in the District of Columbia current budget request: if approved, remainder of $15,300 would be needed for fiscal year 1977).
Action by City Council: Need for legislation due to increase in accidents involving metrobuses was discussed at hearing on transportation safety October 30, 1974. Council passed Act 1-89 on second reading January 13, 1976, by a 13-0 vote.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: Dec. 16. 1975.
Approved by Mayor: Feb. 6, 1976.
Received by Senate: Feb. 12, 1976 (legislative day 174*).
Referred to committee: Feb. 17, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Apr. 9, 1976, D.C. Law 1-60.






51

1-91 To AMEND TIE REVENUE ACT OF 19'5, AS AMENDED, AND To
ADOPT IM:PLE-MENTING REGULATIONS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would amend the District of Columbia Rules and Regulations to conform with recently enacted tax package. Included are provisions to: exempt tenants (rental. co-op or condominium) paying parking fees to their landlords from the new parking tax, and drycleaning, laundry ,md pressing services' receipts from new sales tax: repeal exemption previously given for rental of textiles (uniforms. linens, etc.) to commercial users; levy sales tax on all food and drink prepared for immediate consumption on or off premises where purchased, rather than on only such commodities prepared for consumption off premises, as was formerly so. Bill, in addition, reduces discount permitted licensees of cigarette tax stamp metering machines, and lowers income level at which individuals are required to file tax forms.
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-91-the Third Amendment to the Revenue Act of 1975 Act-January 13, 1976, on second reading, by a vote of 12-0 (one member absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed: Opposition to previouslyenacted parking tax legislation was voiced by residents of co-ops, condominiums and apartments, who already paid parking fees to landlords.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Dec. 16, 1975.
Approved by -Mayor: Feb. 6. 1976.
Received by Senate: Feb. 12, 1976 (legislative day 174*).
Referred to committee: Feb. 17, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Apr. 9, 1976, D.C. Law 1-61.

1-92 To PROVIDE FOR CERTAIN PROTECTIONS FOR CONSUMERS PUnCHASING MEMBERShIPS IN HEALT-IP CLUBS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLrI-NBL AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would establish consumer protection regulations covering the purebase and cancellation of memberships in health spas. It would provide specifically purchaser's right to cancel a membership for any reason within 15 days after contract is made, and after 15 days for reasons of illness, change of residence, injury, and would institute a pro rata refund policy. Requirements concerning language and content of contracts and procedures for the making and cancellation of them would be set. Further, any spa selling memberships prior to its construction would be required to maintain a bond ($15,000 minimum) issued by a District of Columbia surety company until three months after beginning operations. As no additional administrative functions are assigned to District government by bill, other than general District of Columbia Office of Consumer Affairs oversight, legislation is expected to have no fiscal impact.
Action by City Council: Public hearings held June 16. 1975. Council passed Act 1-92-the Health Spa Consumer Protection Act-on second reading January 13, 1976, by a 13-0 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.






52

Adopted by Council: Jan. 13, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: Feb. 10, 1976.
Received by Senate: Feb. 19, 1976 (legislative day 177*).
Referred to committee: Feb. 23, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Apr. 14, 1976, D.C. Law 1-62.

1-95 To IMPLEMENT THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
Effect of legislation: Legislation would establish regulations for flood control/flood damage prevention required for District of Columbia's participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. Proviions authorize Mayor to review building permit applications, subdivision and development proposals, excavation-gradinig-fill-construction permit requests for compliance with flood control standards; and to require new or replacement water and sanitary sewage systems to minimize flood threat. Emergency legislation substantially similar was passed previously to allow sale of national flood insurance, the lowcost. federally-subsidized program providing homeowners and apartment dwellers with contents insurance and homeowners and commercial establishments with structural insurance: Act 1-95 would make the emergency measure permanent. No financial impact for the District 'overnment is anticipated.
Action by City Council: Council passed emergency legislation October 29. 1975, to meet November 1 deadline for filing applications for participation in Flood Insurance Program; District of Columbia appliention was accepted October 30. Act 1-95 was passed by Council 13-0 on February 24, 1976.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: Feb. 24, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: Mar. 19, 1976.
Received by Senate: Mar. 29, 19,6 (legislative day 196*).
Referred to committee: Apr. 1, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: May 25, 1976, D.C. Law 1-64.

1-97 To PROVIDE IMMUNITY TO COUNCIL MEMBERS WITH REGARD TO
CONDUCT DURING THE COURSE OF LEGISLATIVE DUTIES AND OTHER
PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would provide City Council members with immunity from civil action/criminal prosecution for speech or debate made in the course of their legislative duties. It also creates criminal penalties for interference with witnesses, documentary material under Council subpoena, proceedings before or investigations by Council.
It should be noted that "legislative duties," as defined in the act, include, but are not limited to, "everything said, written or done" in Council sessions, meetings, investigations, and in process of drafting and publishing legislation and reports. Thus, Council's grant of immunity appears to be considerably broader than that afforded Congress by Constitution, in that there is no restriction on place.








Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed Act 1-97-the Legislative Privilege Act of 1975-on second reading February 24, 1976, by a 12-0 vote, in the absence of one member.
Congressional /public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Feb. 24, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: Mar. 22, 1976.
Received by Senate: Apr. 7, 1976 (legislative day 202").
Referred to committee: Apr. 14, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 5, 1976, D.C. Law 1-65.

1-98 To PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL TIME FOR COUNCIL REVIEW OF THE
N OiiEES TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUM11BLA BOXING AND WRESTLING
ComImissIoN
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend to 90 days (from. original 30) the time allowed for Council review of Mayor's nominations to District of Columbia Boxing and Wrestling Commission. Council's 1975 legislation, creating Commission to oversee events in those sports, directed Mayor to nominate chairperson and two members, and Council to confirm or deny within 30 days; absence of Council action within that period was to have resulted in de facto confirmation of nominees. Council committee report indicates 30-day limit insufficient for scheduling hearings, affording adequate public notice, etc. In absence of Council action within new 90-day period, nominations would still receive automatic confirmation.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Mayor neither signed nor vetoed; report notes that no sanction applies to his inaction in this case. Council passed Act 1-98-the District of Columbia Boxing and Wrestling Commission Nominee Confirmation Procedure Act--on second reading February 24, 1976, by a 13-0 vote.
Adopted by Council: Feb. 24, 1976.
Enacted without Mayor's signature: Mar. 23, 1976.
Received by Senate: Apr. 8, 1976 (legislative day 203').
Referred to committee: Apr. 14, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 8, 1976, D.C. Law 1-66.

1-102 To EXTEND TIHE AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION FOR TILE
PROVISION OF LEGAL DEFENSE TO INDIGENT PERSONS IN THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend indefinitely authorization of appropriations for representation of indigents in criminal cases. Original authority, granted by Congress in District of Columbia Criminal Justice Act, provided for funding of the program from Treasury moneys credited to District for fiscal years 1975 and 1976. Authorization was limited to two-year period because program was considered an interim measure, continuing a "relatively successful" system pending further study and eventual enactment of permanent legislation. City Council Committee on the Judiciary and Criminal






54

Law studying feasibility of more comprehensive program. District's FY '77 budget request for program is $2,495,000. (Original cost estimate in Senate's 1974 report on Criminal Justice Act was $2.3 million for each fiscal year.)
Action by City Council: No hearings held. Council passed Act 1-102--the Criminal Justice Act Authorization Extension Act-on second reading March 9, 1976, by a 13-0 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Mar. 9, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: Mar. 29,1976.
Received by Senate: Apr. 19, 1976 (legislative day 208*).
Referred to committee: Apr. 26, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 15, 1976, D.C. Law 1-69.
1-104 To GRANT THE CONSENT OF THE DISTRIcT OF COLUMBIA TO
AMEND THE METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON AREA TRANsIT REGULATION COMPACT TO AUTHORIZE THE WASHINGTON METROPOLITANAREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN A MiRo TRAwsrr POLICE FORCE; TO AUTHORIZE THE WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO MUTuALAm AGREEMENTS WITH THE VARIOUS JURISDICTIONS WITHIN THE TRANSIT ZONE, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would grant consent of District to Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact amendments authorizing establishment of police force to protect Metro facilities, personnel, and patrons. Jurisdiction would be limited to Metro facilities, on which transit police could execute traffic citations/ criminal process issued by courts of any signatory; for violation of Metro regulations, they could also execute criminal process throughout Metro service area with exception of Maryland. They would have same powers and limitations as regular police of locality in which they operate, but would be authorized to carry only weapons issued by Metro authority and, then, only during and in transit to/from their work assignments. Their qualifications would be required at least to equal those of comparable personnel employed by signatories. Measure empowers Metro Authority to establish classification system, terms for compensation, pensions, retirement benefits. etc.; contract for police training; enter into mutual aid agreements with signatories, and adopt regulations for use of transit facilities. Fines for violation of Metro rules would be set at maximum of $250 plus costs.
Action by City Council: Hearing held September 18, 1975, with no opposing witnesses. Council passed Act 1-104--the Metro Transit Police Force Act of 1975-on second reading March 9, 1976, by a vote of 13-0.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Senate District Committee hearings held April 1, 1976, on H.R. 8719, to provide Congressional consent to WMATRC amendments, adopting and enacting those amendments for the District of Columbia.
Impact on Federal interest in District: Yes.
Adopted by Council : Mar. 9, 1976.






55

Approved by Mayor: Apr. 1, 1976.
Received by Senate: Apr. 12, 1976 (legislative day 205*).
Referred to committee: Apr. 14,1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 10, 1976. D.C. Law 1-67.
1-105 To EXTENSIVELY REVISE THE CHILD LABOR LAWS IN THE
DIsmIcT OF COLUM31BIA, AND FOR OTHER PURrOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would modernize child labor regulations to: provide uniform hours, acceptable occupations and age limitations for minors of either sex; allow issuance of theatrical pernits for minors to appear in professional sports events, radio-television programs, theatrical-motion picture-musical productions, and as fashion models; prohibit business establishments from allowing those under age 16 to loiter on premises during school hours; increase penalties for repeated violations; simplify certain aspects of work permit application procedures. Administration of work permit program would be vested in Board of Education, which has effectively had such authority for some time. No additional expenses are expected, but Board would be allowed to authorize funds and employees it feels appropriate at its discretion. (Costs in 1975 totalled $79,867, of which $39,051 came from federal impact aid grant and $40,816 from operating funds.
Action by City Council: Roundtable discussion held October 30, 1975 included participants from Chamber of Commerce, Greater Washington Central Labor Council, Federation of Citizens Associations, ACLU, Washington Urban League, Commission on Status of Women, the Spanish Education Development Center, and various District of Columbia government representatives. None opposed the legislation. Council passed Act 1-105-the Child Labor Amendments of 1975-on second reading March 9, 1976. by a 13-0 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed : None.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Mar. 9,1976.
Approved by Mayor: Apr. 5, 1976.
Received by Senate : Apr. 14, 1976 (legislative day 207*).
Referred to committee : Apr. 26, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 12, 1976. D.C. Law 1-68.

1-106 REVE-NUE ACT 0)F 1976-To PROVIME ADDITIONAL REVENUL-E FOR TIE DISTRICT OF COLUM31BIA
Effect of legislation: Legislation would raise approximately $96.96 million in revenues for FY '77 and transition quarter by increasing: personal income taxes (on adjusted gross incomes of $.5,000 and above) by average of 9.1 percent; taxes on transient accommodations and restaurant meals to 8 percent of gross receipts from 6 percent; water and sewer rates by approximately 40.6 percent; parking tax to 12 percent (was 8 percent) ; cigarette tax to 13 cents from 10 cents; motor vehicle registration fees by approximately one-third. Measure would also restore 5 percent sales tax on utilities for residential taxpayers, which was to have ended in June, while continuing tax






56

at identical level for commercial users. Two provisions would result in revenue losses; restoration of 2 percent gross earnings tax rate on building associations, which was raised to 3 percent by Revenue Act of 1975 and subsequently proven inequitable, and revision of the motor vehicle excise tax schedule to encourage use of smaller cars and ease administration. Payment date for first half-year of real estate taxes would be advanced to September 15 (was September 30) to make $26 million available for transition quarter spending requirements; second payment would remain due on March 31. Legislation also authorizes Mayor to contract with private financial institutions in District of Columbia for collection/processing of revenues. Contracts to be let on basis of competitive bidding, with preference given to those showing clear evidence of "marked and exceptional improvement in their lending and employment practices in recent years" as demonstrated by data on: total dollar amounts and percentage of deposits given by census tract, with enough information to indicate deposits received from inside and outside the District: numbers and percentages of directors, officers. professional and nonprofessional employees, who are "white, black, other" and who are District of Columbia residents and nonresidents. Measure mandates studies, with an eve toward revision of franchise tax deductions and exemptions; taxation of certain financial institutions and insurance companies, and water and sewer service rates. Council also is directed to design different real property tax rates for categories of property, with taxation to be apportioned according to property use.
Action by City Council: Hearings held January 19-20, 1976, and roundtable discussion Jan. 30. Council passed Act 1-106-the Revenue Act of 1976-on second reading March 11. 1976. by vote of 7-5, with one member absent. On vote to reconsider, to include clarifying amendments, final tally was 12-1, with one absence.
Congressional /public interest expressed : None.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council : Apr. 6, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: Apr. 20,1976.
Received by Senate: Apr. 23, 1976 (legislative day 208*).
Re ferred to committee : Apr. 26, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 15, 1976, D.C. Law 1-70.

SUMINMARY-REVENUE ACT OF 1976 (ACT 1-106)

(Total : $96.96 million)
Title I. Registration fees for motor veh.dces. tiad7ers. Increases registration fees for motor vehicles by approximately one-third; establishes four-tier rate scale (by weight) for passenger vehicles. Will produce $5 million in added fiscal year 1977 revenues. Effective
October 1, 1976.
Title II. Motor vehicle excise tax. Creates four-tier rate scale for motor
vehicle excise tax (replacing flat 6 percent level for all). Will reducer revenues by $0.55 million ii fiscal year 1977. Effective October 1,
1976.






57

Title III. Real estate tax collection date; taxt'on of real property.
Advances payment date for first ialf-yeir of real estate taxes to September' 15 from September 30. (Second payment would rciv ai N (Iue by March 31.) Will make available additional "'2( million for transition quarter, plus $1.8) million in Fiscal Year 1977. )irects Council to establish different categories of real property according to use, and rates for each within 30 days of Mayor's siibmission of proposed rates on July 15. Property falling into more than one category would be apportioned into proper classifications, with each area taxed at appropriate rate. 1 pward revision in assessed
value of taxable real property expected to yield $6 million.
Title IV. Sales and usIe taxes (lodinqs., serci 'cs, food, d),ink, utilities).
Restores 5 percent sales tax on utilities for residential taxpayers, which was to have ended in June, 1976. Will produce additional 8.9 million. Identical tax on commercial users will result in $8.7 million. Raises sales and use taxes on parking to 12 percent from 8 percent, except on Metro facilities (raising $1.9 million in revenues); on lodgings, to 8 percent from 6 percent of gross receipts ($3.6 million) ; on restaurant meals to 8 percent from 6 percent ($7.64 million). Effective first day of first month after enactment
(May 1).
Title V. Cigarette tax. Increases cigarette tax to 13 cents per pack
from 10 cents, resulting in $3 million gain.
Title VI. Water and sewer service rates. Increases water rates to 39.4
cents (from 30 cents) per 100 cubic feet used and sewer charges to 44.8 cent per 100 cubic feet (from 90 percent of water service charge, in effect a 40.6 percent increase, if Mayor can certify by May 1, 1976, that all bills for service rendered through October 19, 1975 have been mailed out. Will produce $11.5 million. Appropriates total of $50,000 for preparation of two reports: one from Public Service Commissioners to justify rate increases, describing and recommending alternative rate structures and methods for their determination, and suggesting procedure for Commission review of Mayors proposals re rate increases; the other, from the People's Counsel, detailing effect of rate rises on consumers and procedures, experiences and law in other jurisdictions in which a public service commission recommends rates to be charged by a governmentowned utility. Sums appropriated for the two studies are $30,000 and $20,000, respectively, charged 50-50 against water and sewer
revenues.
Title VII. Payment of D.C. revenues at private flnanc'l institutions.
Authorizes Mayor to contract with private financial institutions having business offices in District for collection and processing of District of Columbia taxes and fees. Contracts to be let by competitive bidding, with preference given to those institutions having "best records of serving the citizens of the District through their lending and employment policies." Records to be judged by reports for most recent year, submitted with the bids, providing: (1) total dollar amounts and percentages of the institution's deposits by ,census tract, with sufficient data to compare figures from inside and outside District; (2) number and percentages of members of






58

board of directors, officers, professional and nonprofessional employees who are "white, black, other" and who are/are not District of Columbia residents. Preference to be shown those institutions having clear evidence of "marked and exceptional improvement
in their lending and employment practices in recent years."
Title VIII. Franichise tax study. Mayor to submit to Council and
District of Columbia Auditor within one year a report analyzing the deductions and exemptions allowed under the District of Columbia franchise tax, including justification for each; sample of dollar amounts involved, both in aggregate and according to size and category of business taxed; cost to District, detailed in same terms. With report, Mayor also to submit a proposed bill to close whatever loopholes are found to exist.
Title IX. Gross receipts tax study. Mayor directed to submit within
six months a study of taxation of financial institutions and insurance companies in District, including data as to the appropriateness of' current rates and manner of taxation; equity of District of Columbia taxes on such institutions as compared to those levied on other District of Columbia entities and on similar institutions elsewhere; impact of switching from gross earnings/receipts methods for determining tax liability to a net income method. Report to include recommendations and a bill to effect what changes might be deemed
necessary.
Title X. Cigarette stamnAps; employee withholding certificates. Reduces discount for bulk purchases of cigarette tax stamps to 2 percent from 2.5 percent. Removes requirement that employees file amended withholding certificates when spouse for whom they've
been claiming exemption dies.
Title XI. Income and Franchise Tax Act amendments. Allows partyear District of Columbia residents to prorate standard deductions.
Requires District of Columbia residents who are exempt from District of Columbia income taxes (other than elected federal officials ,and presidential appointees subject to Senate confirmation) to file
certificates of nonresidence.
Title XII. Personal income taxes. Increases personal income taxes
(on incomes over $5,000) an average of 9.1 percent, producing approximately $14.9 million in fiscal year 1977, $2.57 million in interim. Figures represent compromise between hikes proposed by Ma-yor, which averaged 17 percent while rising to as much as 2Or percent, and Council Committee on Finance and Revenue recoinmnendation that District of 'Columbia personal income taxes-alreadythe highest in the area in most income levels-not be raised at all. New rates effective taxable year beginning January 1, 1976. Title XIII. Savings and loan tax reduction. Restores savings. and
loan association tax to 2 percent, from 3 percent, of gross earnings.
Revenue Act of 1975 raised the tax to 3 percent, which subsequent study has demonstrated is inequitable. (At 2-percent rate-already second highest in Nation-savings and loans paid $4.5 million in District of Columbia taxes in 1974; if taxed under bank formula, that liability would have been $3 million, and, under formula for regular corporations, approximately $1.5 million. Most States tax building associations at percentage of net income, with effective








rates ranging from about 6 percent to a 20-percent high; District of Columbia's effective tax rate in 1974 as a percentage of net income was 30 percent.) Title VII of bill mandates study of taxation of financial institutions to serve as basis for any appropriate revisions which may be necessary. Return to 2-percent rate will result in loss of $2.5 million in fiscal year 1977; $1 million in interim quarter; effective with respect to gross earnings for year ending June 30, 1977.

1-107 To PROIIT, FOR A LIAImD TIME, TILE CONVERSION OF CERTAIN RENTAL HouSING ACCOMIMODATIONs INTO COOPERATIVE HousING ACCOMMODATIONS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would prohibit conversion of multifamily apartment accommodations to cooperatives for 180 days, with Mayor empowered to grant exemption if less than 50 percent of units are unoccupied or more than 50 percent of occupants (of accommodation at least half-full) have agreed in writing to such conversion. Measure extends emergency legislation enacted in January to ban conversions due to their proliferation as method to circumvent moratorium on condominiums. Council seeks to block formation of cooperative associations for additional 180 days in order to develop permanent legislation governing establishment and conduct of cooperatives. No fiscal impact is anticipated.
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-107-the Cooperative Conversion Moratorium Act-on second reading March 23,1976, by an 11-0 vote, in the absence of two members.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Mar. 23,1976.
Approved by Mayor: Apr. 22, 1976.
Received by Senate: Apr. 30, 1976 (legislative day 212*).
Referred to committee: May 3, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 19, 1976. D.C. Law 1-71k

1-108 To AME-ND TILEADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COMISIONS ACT OF
1975 To ALLOW FOR AN ADDITIONAL PERIOD FOR THE CIRCULATION OF PETITIONS To ESTABLISH COMMISSIONS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend time period during which petitions to establish Advisory Neighborhood Commissions in designated areas may be submitted to City Council. Election of members of the new Commissions would be held November 2, 1976. Purpose is to give neighborhood council areas an additional opportunity tG establish commissions. (Of 36 ANC areas delineated by Council in 1975 Advisory Neighborhood Commissions Act, six failed to submit petitions requesting creation of commissions; the six are designated as those to which this measure applies.) Board of Elections is authorized to administer resulting ANC members elections according to District of Columbia Elections Act, and to "ensure that the election provided for..,. is held in an efficient manner." Board estimates 178 days' time required to conduct proposed elections. Fiscal impact statement was requested by Council from the Board of Electionis: as of March 3, 1976, the date of Council's committee report,, none had been received.






60

Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed Act 1-108-the Supplementary Neighborhood Commissions Act--on second reading March 23, 1976, by an 11-0 vote, with two members absent.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Mar. 23, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: Apr. 26, 1976.
Received by Senate: Apr. 30, 1976 (legislative days 212*).
Referred to committee: May 3, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 19, 1976. D.C. Law 1-72.
1-109 To AMEND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMIBIA POLICE AND FIREMEN'S SALARY ACT OF 1958 TO INCREASE SALARIES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would raise salaries of District police and firemen six percent, retroactive to October 1, 1976, and provide second adjustment in October, 1976, comparable to that given federal employees. Estimated cost would be $5,720,445 in fiscal year 1976 and $7,987,570 in fiscal year 1977, based on current department sizes, pension costs, et cetera; appropriate amounts have been included in Council's budgets. Last payraise given police and firemen was in July, 1974.
Action by City Council: Mayor originally submitted legislation providing for an 8% pay hike, retroactive to January 1, and additional 10% raise in October, 1975; figures conformed to settlement negotiated by him in collective bargaining with unions. Council, not having participated in the negotiations, considered itself unbound by agreement made by Mayor (Council's general counsel and the Corporation Counsel concurred) and his settlement too generous. It therefore revised the terms and passed measure described above-the District of Columbia Police and Firemen's Salary Act Amendments of 1975-on second reading March 23, 1976, by vote of 10-1 (two members absent). Mayor neither approved nor disapproved Act 1-109; it has been submitted to Congress without his signature.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Mar. 23, 1976.
Enacted without Mayor's signature: April 27, 1976.
Received by Senate: April 30, 1976 (legislative day 212*).
Referred to committee: May 3, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: June 19, 1976. D.C. Law 1-73.

1-113 To AMEND REGULATION No. 72-17 RELATING TO STANDARDS OF
ASSISTANCE FOR PUBLIc ASSISTANCE APPLICANTS AND RECIPIENTS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would, in effect, reenact legislation originally passed by appointed City Council in 1974 and subsequently found to have been enacted without proper public notice (by U.S. District Court Judge Parker in summer of 1975). Original regulations, identical to those enacted in 1-113, raised welfare money payments to 85 percent of standard of need; changed benefit computation regula-








tions which affected recipients under AFDC-supplementation program; allowed Department of Human Resources to use welfare nionev payment as the standard for Medicaid eligibility. Since the regulation changes embodied in the new act have been in effect since January 1, 1975, there is no fiscal impact.
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-113-the Standards of Assistance for Public Assistance Applicants and Recipients Acton second reading April 20, 1976, by a vote of 10-0 (three absences).
Co(ngressionall/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on Federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: April 20, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: May 10, 1976.
Received by Senate:May 14, 1976 (legislative day 220*).
Referred to committee: May 18, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: July 1, 1976. D.C. Law 1-74.
1-116 To STOP DISCRIMINATION ON ACCOUNT OF AGE, SEx. AN
MARITAL STATUS, UNDER DISTRICT OF COLUMIBIA LAws. A(,AINST PER SONS :Ho HAVE REACHED THE AGE OF 18 A.ND To ESTABLISH
THE AGE OF MAJORITY AT 18
Effect of legislation: Legislation would establish age of majority at 18, exempting common law and statutory rights to child support. It would also reduce to 18 age requirements for gaining: various occupational licenses; eligibility for free tuition at District of Coluimbia public schools when parents are nonresidents: power to convey real property and make leases; other legal authority. Legally marriagabie age, formerly 18 for males and 16 for females (with consent of guardian), would become 16 for both sexes. Laws having age cut-otffs not affected by measure include: child labor laws: sentencing of persons under age 22 under Youth Corrections Act; retirement, survivors' and disability benefits; criminal and civil liability for negligent and intentional acts: the legal agefor drinking and buying hard liquor. Private contracts would continue to be permitted to specify the age of 21 as a requirement for doing business. Only potential fiscal impact would be any resulting from change in public school free tuition eligibility, and would, in any case, be negligible.
Impact on federal interest in District : None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Strong opposition, primarily from churches, generated by original version of act, which would have lowered drinking age to 18.
Action by City Council: Council deleted provision lowering age for buying/selling hard liquor to 18 following Mayoral veto of original bill. Final version of Act 1-116-the Age of Majority Act-passed on second reading April 20, 1976, by voteof 10-0 (3 absences). Adopted by Council: Apr. 20, 1976. Approved by Mayor: May 14, 1976.
Received by Senate: May 21, 1976 (legislative day 224*).
Referred to committee: May 24, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: July 21, 1976. D.C. Law 1-75.






62

1-118 To PROVIDE CONSUMERS IN THFE DISTRICT WrI PROCEDURES FOR THE REDRESS OF IMPROPER TRADE PRACTICES, AND FOR OTHEIER PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would create Office of Consumer Protection, with expanded powers, and specify procedures for its handling of consumer complaints. Office, to be headed by director appointed by Mayor, would include a general counsel, a section of investigations, and a full-time administrative law judge (also a mayoral appointee) to decide cases, order redress. Measure empowers office to: investigate complaints, initiate investigations, hold hearings; subpoena witnesses, documents; issue cease and desist orders; settle cases and provide contract, restitutionary, injunctive, other remedies. It could not grant tort damages or handle cases concerning: landlord-tenant relations; professional services of doctors, lawyers, clergy; print/broadcast media (for violations in advertising not their own). Legislation enumerates certain trade practices to be considered unlawful whether or not they mislead/damage any consumer, including: misrepresentation (by commission or omission) of nature/condition/ price/availability of goods/services; performance of incomplete/ unnecessary repairs; disparagement of another's goods servicess by misrepresent ation. Also unlawful would be the making or enforcement of "unconscionable terms or provisions" of sales/leases, with reference to such factors as: person's knowledge at time of credit sale that there is no reasonable probability of consumer making payment in fuill: knowledge at time of sale of consumer's inability to receive substantial benefits f rom whatever is sold /leased; gross disparity between price, value of property/services sold or leased and that readily available to like buyer/lessee elsewhere-, person's taking advantage of consumer's inability to protect own interests due to mental or physical infirmity, ignorance, illiteracy, inability to understand language of agreement. Fiscal impact estimated at approximately $15,000 (bulk of cost to be borne by budget, for Office of Consumer Affairs, wb ich new office replaces, plus revenues from fines and costs levied by it).
Action by City Council: Hearings held November 5, 1975. Original version of bill vetoed by Mayor, who objected to requirements for Council confirmation and District of Columbia residency of top office personnel. Requirements were deleted and resultant District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act passed on second reading April 20, 1976, by vote of 10-0 (3 absences).
Impact on federal interest in District : None.
Congressional /public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council : Apr. 20,1976.
Approved by Mayor : May 14,1976.
Received by Senate : May 21, 1976 (legislative day 224*).
Referred to committee : May 24,1976.
Congressional review period expired: July 21,1976. D.C. Law 1-76.

1-120 To PROVIDE ADDITIO-NAL REVENUE FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Effect of legislation: Legislation would levy a surtax of 10%7 on tax liabilities of corporations and unincorporated businesses in District, for taxable years beginning January, 1976. In effect a tax on a tax,






63

the surtax would increase present business tax rate by nine-tenths of one percent, from current nine percent level to 9.9% on net income. Estimated revenues produced by the measure would be $0.6 million in the interim quarter and $1.2 million in fiscal year 1977 from corporations, and $0.25 million for the interim plus $1.80 million for fiscal year 1977 from unincorporated businesses. Surtax was enacted as substitute revenue source, compensating for loss of anticipated funds from new, differential property tax rates which could not be implemented immediately due to administrative problems. As the new rates were aimed at businesses, whose District of Columbia taxes already are high, choice of surtax, considered to have temporary connotations, was made over option of raising tax rate itself. Council will examine xate and surtax in deliberations on fiscal 1978 tax package.
Congressional/pu~blic interest expressed: Surtax originally proposed by Metropolitan Washington Board of Trade at hearings on fiscal year 1977 budget, and supported by Board thereafter.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Action by City Council: Roundtable discussion including representatives of business community, apatmenit and office owners, and the law, held April 1, 1976;- Board of Trade representative reiterated that body's support of surtax. Council passed the Corporate and Unincorporated Business Franchise Surtax Act of 19 76 on second reading April 20, 1976, by a vote of 9-1, in absence of three members.
Adopted by Council: Apr. 20, 19 76.
Approved by Mayor: May 18, 1976.Received by Senate: May 25, 1976 (legislative day 226*').
Referred to committee : May 27,1976.
Congressional review period expired: July 23, 1976. D.C. Law 1-77.

1-130 To EXTEND REGULATION 74-21 (ESTABLISHING INTEREST RATES
FOR CERTAIN LOANS) FOR 2 YEARS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend to August, 1978, exemptions to the eight percent maximum interest rate in District applying specifically to residential mortgage loans.
Action by City Council: No hearings were held. Council passed the Interest Rate Extension Act of 1976 on second reading May 18, 1976, by a vote of 10-0 in the absence of three members.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council: May 18, 1.976.
Approved by Mayor: June 4, 19 76.
Received by Senate: June 8, 1976 (legislative day 233*).
Referred to committee: Junie 9, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Aug. 4, 1976, D.C. Law 1-78.

1-13 1 To ORGANIZE THE BOARD, OF ELECTIONS AND ETHICS OF THlE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend lobbying reportingrregistration requirements to dealings with executive branch and agencies of the District of Columbia, government. Anyone receivinga/ex-






64

pending more than $250 quarterly for lobbying purposes would be required to file semiannual reports citing all oral/written communications relating to lobbying with government officials, itemizing expenditures of $50 or more, supplying other data. Citizens' civil suits to enforce provisions would be permitted. Filing of financial disclosure statements by all District of Columbia employees who make "field decisions," regardless of gTade, and unexempted persons earning at least $29,818 per annum would be required. Measure authorizes operation of constituent service programs by Mayor and Council members, and collection-expenditure of funds for them, with limits of $20,000 (Mayor, Council chairman, members-at-large) and $10,000 (members elected by ward) yearly. Funds would not count against candidates' campaign spending limits; campaigning in program facilities would be prohibited. Regarding election and voting law, legislation would: prohibit corporate and union contributions; permit reenfranchisement of ex-felons at end of incarceration or completion of sentence (current law provides three-to-five-year disability); release committed delegates to conventions after first ballot or candidate withdrawal; require provision of multilingual election materials in wards with five percent or more eligible voters who are not English-spealdng. Due process removal protection would be extended to Board of Elections, and Board nominating committee abolished. The Board would be permitted to hear challenges by means of one-member panels. Measure is expected to have no fiscal impact: Council estimates that cost of implementing lobbying and financial disclosure provisions (approximately $50,000) would be offset by savings from abolishing Board of Elections nominating committee.
Action by City Council: Series of hearings held during 1974 and 1975; comments solicited from citizens' and interest groups. affected institutions. Council passed the Election Act Amendments of 1976 on second reading May 18, 1976, by a 13-0 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Objections voiced by institutions and lobbyists to original provision requiring quarterly filing of lobbying reports. Groups including ACLU and Common Cause support legislation.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: May 18, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: June 18, 1976.
Received by Senate: June 22, 1976 (legislative day 243*).
Referred to committee: June 23, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 1, 1976. D.C. Law 1-79.

1-132 To AMEND D.C. LAW No. 1-.4, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ACT oN THE AGING
Effect of legislation: Legislation would clarify distinction between the advisory role of the District of Columbia Commission on the Aging and the operational role of the District of Columbia Office on Aging in matters concerning senior citizens 'by redistributing agencies' functions. Measure was introduced in response to recommendations of Federal Commissioner on Aging, who considered that vesting in Commission on the Aging the responsibility for approval of annnual state






65

plan and review of proposed legislation had been inappropriate. Act 1-132 transfers the former function to Mayor and the latter to the Office on Aging; Commission retains capacity to comment upon the review of legislation by Office on Aging. Legislation would have no fiscal impact.
Action by City Council: Council passed the District of Columbia Agging Act Amendments on second reading April 20, 1976, by a vote of 10-0 (3 absent).
Congressional /public interest expressed: None.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council : Apr. 20, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: June 18, 1976.
Received by Senate: June 28, 1976 (legislative day .47*).
Referred to committee : June 28, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 11, 1976, D.C. Law 1-83.
1-133 To AMEEND TILE SU7BDIvIsIoN REGULATIONS FOR THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA RELATING TO THE SUBDIVISION OF HISTORIC SITES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would require that applications to subdivide District properties containing historic sites be published in District of Columbia Register and reviewed by Mayor to determine whether proposed subdivisions are in public interest. If they were not, Mayor could delay subdivision for 180-day period, during which time negotiations could be held to find means of preserving the sites. (Judicial review would be permitted anyone aggrieved by a mayoral decision in this regard.) Mayor would be directed to develop standards and procedures for carrying out legislation within 30 days of enactment; no related decision would be permitted until promulgation of such standards.
Action by City Council: Council passed the Historic Sites Subdivision Amendments of 1976 on second reading June 1, 1976, by a vote of 11-0 (2 absent). No hearings were held.
Impact on federal interest in District: None, other than its protection in form of preserving historic sites.
Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Adopted by Council : June 1. 1976.
Approved by Mayor:June 18,1976.
Received by Senate: June 22, 1976 (legislative day 243*).
Referred to committee: June 23, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 1, 1976. D.C. Law 1-80.
1-134 To PERIMrIT THE ADVERTISING OF DRUG PRICES, TO REQUIRE RETAILERS OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS TO POST THE PRICES OF CERTArN
COMMONLY PRESCR BED DRUGS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would require pharmacies to display prominently listings of: selling prices for the 100 most commonly use drugs (by proprietary name) ; therapeutically equivalent drugs commonly available; professional/convenience services offered and additional charges for them, if any; terms and eligibility for any dis-





66

counts offered. Disclosure of such data upon telephoned request also, would be required. Any restriction against advertising of prices and other information regarding prescription drugs would be prohibited. Measure would regulate substitution of generic equivalents for prescript ion drugs by authorizing pharmacist to make such substitutions unless physician or patient specifically requests otherwise, but only if' substitution would not result in higher price or purchaser consented to paying more. If prescribed product were not in stock, only the low-. est-priced substitution could be made. Council believes existing workload and budgets of departments which would administer legislation-Office of Consumer Affairs and Department of Human Resources-would permit them to absorb new functions without added cost; thus, estimated fiscal impact would be up to $300 per annum fornext five years, the cost of printing posters for required display of prices, et al.
Action by City Council: Hearing held 9June 18, 1975. Council. passed the. Prescription Drug Price Information Act on second reading May 18, 1976, by a vote of 11-0, in the absence of two members.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Consumer groups support such legislation. While Council committee report notes that consumer and industry representatives testified at hearing, their identities
and affiliations were not supplied.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council : May 18,1976.
Approved by Mayor: June 16. 1976.
Received by Senate: June 25, 1976 (legislative day 245*).
Referred to committee : June 25,1976.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 9,1976. D.C. Law 1-81.

1-135 To PROVIDE ADDITIONAL REVENUE FOR THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA. AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Effect of legislation: Legislation would generate additional revenue by raising charges for certain business, occupational and professionallicenses; public space permit, riparian permit, electrical and corporation fees; rates for D.C. General Hospital, D.C. Village and Glen Dale Hospital; other fees and permits. It also would authorize Council to require licensing of other enterprises and to adjiust fees at its discretion (but at sums "not less than the cost to the District" of providing necessary services). Most charges have not been increased in several years. Measure would, in addition, permit issuance of undertaker's license without prerequisite examination to licensees of otherStates/territories which possess licensing requirements no less stringent than District's and which accept licensing of District of Columbia undertakers in similar fashion. Fiscal impact of user charge and license fee increases orgialy proposed by Mayor was estimated at approximate total of $8.3 million ($5 million of that resulting from DHTR rate hikes at the three hospitals), in FY '77. Subsequent changes by Council, however, further increased certain rates: no information as to resultant revenues is supplied in report on bill as amended.
Action by City Council: Council passed Act 1-135-the License Fees and Charges Act of 1976-on second reading April 6, 1976, by a vote of 11-0 (2 absent).






67

Congressional/public interest expressed: None.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: Apr. 6,1976.
Approved by Mayor: June 22, 1976.
Received by Senate: June 28, 1976 (legislative day 247*).
Referred to committee : June 28, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 11, 1976. D.C. Law 1-82.

1-137 To PROVIDE A PERIOD OF 20 DAYS IN WHICH To ELIMINATE
DEFICIENCIES IN VEHICLES REJECTED AT INSPECTION BY 'TUE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Effect of legislation: Legislation would extend to 20 days the period permitted for correction of deficiencies in vehicles rejected after inspection by the Department of Transportation. District's DOT Director considers present 10-day grace period insufficient to secure repairs, as (1) repair Shops no longer maintain large inventories and thus require additional time for ordering replacement parts, and
(2) many shops are unable to perform repairs within 10 days. He also avers that "virtually every repair can be accomplished within 20 days" and that such an extension would not constitute too great a threat to safety considerations. The act would have no fiscal impact on the District government.
Action by City Council: Council passed the Rejected Vehicle Inspection Extension Act on second reading June 15, 1976, by a vote of 12-0 (1 absent).
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Congressional/public interest expressed : None. Adopted by Council : June 15,1976.
Approved by Mayor: July 2,1976.
Received by Senate: July 12,1976 (legislative day 252*).
Referred to committee: July 19, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 18, 19 76, D.C. Law 1-84.

1-141 To ESTABLISH AN OFFCE ON LATINo AFFAIRS A-ND A
CommissioN ON LATIO ComXuJNIT DEVELOPMENT
Effect of legislation: Legislation would: create in the executive office of the Mayor an Office of Latino Affairs, headed by an executive director, and 'a Commission on Latino Community Development; abolish the existing Office of Spanish Affairs in the Department of Human Resources,- and provide that each District of Columbia grovernment agency with more than 500 employees have a Spanish Program Coordinator who would devote at least 25%~ of office time to developing and implementing Latino-oriented programs /policies in the agency. Director of Office of Latino Affairs. to be appointed by Mayor from among names submitted by Commission. would coordinate program coordinators' activities; administer programs promoting welfare of Latino community; provide information/technical aid to government regarding Latino programs and services; conduct and fund research/demonstration projects; be responsible for control, evaluation, audit and reporting on programs funded by the Office; and file an an-








nual report on its operations. Commission would be an advisory body, with 15 members appointed by Mayor plus heads of various District of Columbia government departments ex officio, all serving without compensation. It would serve as advocate for Latino persons in District of Columbia, developing policy, reviewing and commenting on relevant legislative proposals and the plans undertaken by Office of Latino Affairs. Estimated fiscal impact would be $200,000, an amount authorized in the bill.
Action by City Council: Public hearing held November 24, 1975, and roundtable discussion on March 3, 1976, with representatives of Latino community organizations appearing. Mayor's office voiced doubt of need for new office designed for special interest group and expressed support for existing Department of Human Resources division's record in the area. Council passed the Latino Community Development Act, as amended, on second reading June 29, 1976, by an 11-0 vote (2 absent).
Congressional/public interest expressed: Support from Latino community was indicated by majority of witnesses at Council's hearings; a few argued on behalf of existing structure.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council: June 29,1976.
Approved by Mayor: June 19,1976.
Received by Senate: July 28, 1976 (legislative day 258*).
Referred to committee: July 28, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 29, 1976. D.C. Law 1-86.

1-142 To PROTECT THE CITIZENS OF THE DISTRICT FROf Loss OF PROPERTY, DEATH, AND INJURY, BY CONTROLLING THE AVAILABILITY OF
FIREARMS IN THE COMMUNITY
Effect of legislation: Legislation would ban possession of handguns by other than police officers and special police unless validly registered prior to new law's effective date; new handguns could not thereafter be registered. (Possession of sawed-off shotguns, short-barreled rifles and machine guns would continue to be illegal.) Shotguns and rifles still would be permitted, but their re-registration would be required, with applications for such to be filed within 60 days of enactment. Immunity from arrest or prosecution for violation of regulations would be given anyone surrendering firearm to police, but no payment countenanced. Measure tightens eligibility criteria and expands informational and recordkeeping requirements regarding ammunition and firearms for applicants for registration as individuals, organizations, dealers, and operators of firing ranges. It specifies procedures for issuance, revocation or denial of registration certificates and for appeal of latter actions, and sets penalties for violations (including mandatory maximum sentence for second offense). No registration could be issued to anyone previously convicted of, or currently under indictment for, a crime of violence or weapons offense in preceding five years; committed voluntarily or involuntarily to mental institution/hospital; acquitted of criminal charge by reason of insanity or adjudicated a chronic alcoholic, unless medical certification of recovery is provided; convicted in previous five years of any drug offense or threat of bodily harm; found negligent in firearm mishap causing serious injury or






69

death; unable to demonstrate satisfactory knowledge of firearms and relevant District of Columbia laws. Act also would mandate publicity program to inform citizens of regulations, to be conducted by Chief of Police. Measure, which also permits increased registration fees, would generate approximately $357,500 in additional revenues if fees set at actual cost of $20 per application; current operation sustains a loss of about $72,000 per annum. Only further cost would be $2,500 f or publicity program publications.
Action by City Council: Hearings held June 6-7, 1975, with witnesses from citizens' associations and firearms interest groups. Council passed the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1976 on second reading June 29, 1976, by a 12-1 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Two pieces of legislationH. Res. 1447 and H1. Con. Res. 694. both by Representative Pa.ul-introduced to disapprove Council act (as of August 3. 1976). Stromlg opposition expressed by NRA, which reacted by relocating its intended annual convention site from Washington to Cincinnati, and similar interest organizations.
Adopted by Council: June 29, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: July 23, 1976.
Received by Senate: July 26, 1976 (legislative day 256").
Referred to committee: July 27, 1976.
Referred to committee: July 27, 1976.
Resolution of disapproval introduced by -Mr. Paul (H. Res. 1447) July 29, 1976.
Concurrent resolution of disapproval introduced by Mr. Paul (H. Con. Res. 694) : July 30, 1976.
Resolution of disapproval introduced by -Mr. Ashbrook (11. Res. 1474) ) : Aug. 10, 1976.
Resolutions of disapproval introduced by Mr. Paul (H. Con. Re s. 716 and H. Res. 1481) : Aug. 23, 1976.
Resolutions of disapproval introduced by Mr. Bartlett (S. Con. Res. 135 and S. Res. 526) and by Mr. McClure (S. Res. 527) : Aug. 27, 1976.
Hearing before House committee on H. Con. Res. 694: Aug. 25, 1976.
Resolutions of disapproval introduced by Mr. Paul (H. Con. Res. 763 and H. Res. 1560) : Sept. 21, 1976.
Point of order sustained in House against a motion to dlischarcre House District Committee from further consideration of H. Res. 1481: Sept. 22, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Sept. 24, 19 76. D.C. Law 1-85.
1-143 To AMVEND CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF TItE DisTmcr OF COLIUMBIA CODE IN ORDER To ELIMINATE THEIR SEx DISCRIMINATORY ASPECTS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would amend certain provisions of the District of Columbia Code to remove sex-based language and ,criteria and thus equalize the rights and responsibilities of males and females previously distinct or discriminatory. Sections involving the rights of married women would be revised to ensure that each spouse is legally empowered to engage independently in business arrange-ments, contracts, property ownership, civil litigation, as is an unmarried person. Presumptions based on race, color, sex, sexual orienta-






70

tion, religion, political preference, or national origin of parents in child custody proceedings would be erased. Differences in eligibility of widows and widowers regarding police and firefighters' survivors' benefits would be removed (extending eligibility to widowers who had been married less than one year at time of spouse's death and application of formula including time spent in military srvi ce for determining benefits to widowers as well as widows). Eligiblefathers safeguarding the welfare of their illegitimate children would be provided welfare services presently available to mothers only. Courts would be enabled to award alimony and support to either spouse if circumstances so merited, and provisions dealing with "paternity proceedings" would refer instead to "parentage," abolishing the exclusive orientation toward the father. No fiscal impact is expected as result of the bill.
Action by City Council: Council passed the Anti-Discriminatory Language Act on second reading June 29, 1976, by a vote of 11-0 (2 abse.l/ubi interest expressed: Measure is recommended
and supported by D.C. Commission on the Status of Women and the Women's Legal Defense Fund. It is based on a bill (H.R. 176T7 93d Congress) introduced by Rep. Donald Fraser-including recomnmendations of D.C. Commission on Status of Women in legislative form-and forwarded to Council for consideration.
Impact on federal interest in District: None.
Adopted by Council : June 29, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: July 27,1976.
Received by Senate: July 30, 1976 (legislative day 260*).
Referred to committee: Aug. 2, 1976.
Congressional review period expired: Oct. 1, 1976, D.C. Law 1-87.

1-151 To AMEND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CODE AND REGu-LATIONS
To ENACT A STATUTE PROVIDING FOR THE CREATION AND GOVERNANCEn OF CONDOMINIUMS AND REGULATING T=E OFFERING OF CONDOMINIUM
UNITrS
Effect of legislation: Legislation would end moratorium on conversion to condominiums of: high-rent housing accommodations; buildings in which 51 percent of households agree to conversion; lowand moderately-priced accommodations when citywide vacancy rate for such units exceeds 3 percent. It would provide comprehensive regulations for the creation and governance of condominiums; remove certain barriers to -use of that form of ownership for low-income housing an~d nonresidential purposes; and expand consumer protection by requiring public offering statements, warranting of major components of the units by developer and other means. Two forms of aid to those displaced by conversions would be established. Relocation compensation, at rate of $125 per room 60 square feet or more in size, would be paid by developer to eligible tenants who would be bearing cost of moving to new quarters. Monthly housing assistance payments, to be borne by developer for 24 months following relocation and by city for the 36 months thereafter, would be equal to the difference between 25 percent of tenant's average monthly net income and his new rent, if






71

his original housing expense had been less than 25 percent of that income; expense had been more than 25 percent of income, payment would be the difference between old and new rental figures. Amiount of assistance would not be affected by recipient's entitlement to other District of 'Columbia government assistance for housing or shelter, nor would it be subject to District income taxes. Eligibility of recipients would be judged on basis of income measured against specified percentages of District of Columbia mnediani annual income for various family sizes, and other factors. No specific cost estimates for the act are provided in Council report.. [Note: Sec. 511 (b) contains appar'ently inaccurate reference to subsection 403 (b) ; context indicates subsection 408 (b) probably would be appropriate reference.]
Action by City Council: Hearing held November 14, 197 5. Act I151-the Condominium Act of 1976-was passed by Council on second reading July 20,1976, by an 11-2 vote.
Congressional/public interest expressed: Basic language of act originally drafted by District of Columbia Bar Association. Minority views of Council Committee on Housing and Urban Development member D. Clarke indicate that, in meetings with real estate industry and consumer representatives, some reservations were expressed regarding housing assistance mechanisms but general acceptance of principle was voiced as well.
Impact on federal interest in District: N one.
Adopted by Council: July 20, 1976.
Approved by Mayor: Auguist 26, 1976.
Received by Senate: September 15, 1976 (legislative day 2794).
Referred to committee: September 16, 1976.












PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATIONS REFERRED
Associate Judge of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals
JULIA P. CooPER, confirmed August 1, 1975.
TnEODORE R. NEWMAN, Jr., confirmed October 1, 1976.
Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia
EDwIN C. BaowN, Jr., referred to committee September 29, 1976.
CHARLES WV. HALLECK, pending before the Senate at time of
adjournment.
BRUCE S. MENCHER, confirmed August 1, 1975.
O






UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 09113 4717