Letter to AFRH

[As delivered to the Armed Forces Retirement Home by a group of area residents]

Mr. Timothy C. Cox
Chief Operating Officer
Armed Forces Retirement Home
3700 N. Capitol St NW
Washington, DC 20011-8400

November 9, 2005

Dear Mr. Cox,

We have been following your efforts to possibly develop 160 acres of property, or 59 percent of the federal land that makes up the Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) in Washington, DC. We view the property as important, not only because our nation's military heroes live there, but also because President Lincoln spent a quarter of his presidency on the grounds of the Home.

Lincoln's cottage is being restored as a significant historic site. Long after we are all gone, hundreds of thousands of people will come to see Lincoln's cottage. We believe that this land must be treated as carefully as the property around Washington's Mount Vernon and Jefferson's Monticello.

Unfortunately, what we have witnessed in this process thus far is deeply troubling.

You have excluded the community from participation. You have enlisted developers to help decide whether to develop the land, creating a possible conflict of interest. A developer and her husband are leading your community outreach effort. And, you are crafting your development plan in secrecy.

As is evident from the overwhelming majority of the comments held at the three recent publicity meetings, we believe the community has lost faith in your process. As a first step to try to restore that faith, we request that you answer the following important questions.

What specific criteria qualified people to serve on the community planning committee? Leaders who represent neighborhoods near the Home have been excluded from this panel that is helping you craft the development plan. People who live miles away from the neighborhood have seats on the committee. Park View's United Neighborhood Coalition and a number of Petworth civic and religious organizations have been excluded while neighborhood organizations unrelated to the AFRH neighborhood, such as the Pleasant Plains Civic Association and the African American Civil War Memorial, have been included on the committee.

Metropolis Development Co. and institutions that have expressed a desire for land to develop have seats on the panel. The historians restoring Lincoln's Cottage and DC Parks have also been excluded. You have refused repeated requests to add important representation to this group.

What arrangement does the Armed Forces Retirement Home have with Gotham Development LLC? The firm's owner, Desa Sealy Ruffin, has represented the Home at public forums to solicit neighborhood input. She has answered questions on behalf of the AFRH about who was selected to serve on the planning committee. Her husband, Joe Louis Ruffin, a former city employee, has identified himself as the Home's community outreach coordinator.

What kind of arrangement does the AFRH have with the Ruffins? When Mr. Ruffin spoke to United Neighborhood Coalition about the merits of development, he identified himself as a long-time city resident and a former city employee. He did not tell the community group he was the husband of a developer who is working on the Home project.

Mr. Ruffin has recruited people to serve on the planning panel, whose members include his former boss and other former city employees. Did the Ruffins determine the composition of the panel? Why are a developer and her husband leading an effort to get community input on whether to develop federal land?

What steps has the Home taken to prevent a conflict of interest? Ms. Ruffin previously oversaw construction of a 210-unit townhouse development in Washington. One of the major items under consideration for your plan is the construction of a major townhouse development.

What, if anything, has Ms. Ruffin been told about her possible role in such a townhouse development? Metropolis has developed the five-story Langston Lofts on U Street. Have you taken steps to ensure that developers such as Gotham and Metropolis, who are helping you decide whether to build and what to build, won't later be eligible to profit from any development? If companies that are helping you decide what to develop are also eligible to benefit from that construction, it would be a conflict of interest.

How much money does the Home require from this development plan to sustain its operations? You have said the driving force behind the development plan is the need to secure enough money to sustain the Home. Yet when the community asks you how much money the Home needs, you refuse to answer.

It is impossible for me and others to assess the needed scope of this development plan if you refuse to disclose such basic information. US government agencies do not hide their budget needs. As a representative and employee of the US government, we view it as your duty to provide such basic information to the public. You have also refused the community's request to open the community planning committee meetings to the public. You have also yet failed to make public the un-edited minutes from those meetings, which you promised to do during the October 24, 2005, meeting at St. Gabriel's Church in Washington.

Please send us the answers to these questions by Friday, November 11, 2005.

As you know, you plan to present your development plan next month. So the need for answers to these questions is urgent because there is little time for the community to participate. The best approach would be to slow down this process, involve the community, answer all the questions that have been raised about your process, and do the plan the right way.

We and many others in the community remain prepared to work with you.

Sincerely,
James D. Carstensen
Arlus J. Stephens
Lauri Hafvenstein
Deidre Saunders
Ellen Hughes
Angela Washington

cc: Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton
Councilmember Adrian Fenty
Councilmember Jim Graham
Councilmember Vincent Orange, Sr.

Comments

[Jim Pankey, USN (Ret.)]

Mr. Cox seems to have the protection of a high official in the Department of Defense--please note the method he used in getting rid of the Deputy Director of the AFRH in Gulfport by downloading the DOD Inspector General report regarding abuse of authority by the C.O.O. of AFRH, Tim Cox. The report, H05L95546042, dated 26Sep05, hints at just who is behind his protection. The fact that the report finds Cox guilty of 'cruel and unusual punishment' in the case of LtCol VanDyke yet does nothing to punish Cox or remove him from office, while removing one DOD official, tells me that the report was embarrassing to whoever is protecting Cox' job. It was never made public nor was LtCol VanDyke aware of its existence--she was not on the mailing list--until a fluke exposed it.
The secrecy of Cox' operations are detrimental to the operation and planning of the Home for all concerned--yet he remains aloof and his PAO, Sheila Abarr, refused to publish the Report for the residents in the AFRH newspaper, the COOmunicator.
The methods Cox employs to get rid of dedicated employees is if nothing else despicable, treating them with utmost disrespect (as in the case of LtCol VanDyke) and showing a complete disregard for their right to due process, another finding of the Report.
But the report, available online at http://www.dodig.osd.mil/fo/foia/ERR/H05L95546042.pdf is but the tip of the iceberg concerning the wholesale give-a-shit attitude for anything except his 'Business Plan.'
What lies deeper are more allegations of incompetence and questionable legality of some of Cox's moves. His actions are despicable and not worthy of anyone given a position of authority over the Home, much less the honorable people he is supposed to be serving: the residents!

I am a former resident of AFRH Gulfport and can safely state that the Gulfport home was gutted long before Hurricane Katrina got there!

Jim Pankey, USN (Ret.)
[email protected]

[gary rice]

As a resident of AFRH I can tell you that we are kept in the dark as to what is going on. I feel this is unfair to the community and residents of AFRH.

[Virginia]

Thank you all for stepping up to the plate, the community appreciates your tenacity and shutzpah!

[Joseph Martin]

I have added my name to this letter, speaking for myself only and as the Commissioner for Single Member Disrict 4C09 with a reference to my position as Acting Chair of ANC 4C for identification purposes only.

We were not aware of the letter when we considered our resolution at last night's ANC meeting.

Joe Martin
Acting Chair ANC 4C / 4C09 Commissioner
202-309-1817 cell

[mjbrox]

well done.