CHNNA Archives is the place to go to find historical information. At some point it will need to be re–worked because we already have collected quite a bit of it. Feel free to peruse at your leisure.

Several of the members of the CHNNA Steering Committee attended the DC City Council Hearing on proposed legislation regarding the Florida Avenue Market (also known as the Capitol City Market). In a nutshell, the proposed legislation attempted to redraw the boundaries of the area covered by the original Florida Avenue legislation that, among other things, required New Town developers to garner the support of 50% of the property owners within the market space. As New Town was having a tough time trying to garner that support, the DC City Council proposed to redraw the boundaires in such a way as to eliminate the parcels of land blonging to Gallaudet University and J Street Development, both of which did not support the plans of the New Town Developers. The following testimony was delivered by Tom Madison on behalf of the CHNNA Steering Committee:

This testimony is being delivered on behalf of the Steering Committee of the Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association (CHNNA) to express our opposition to the New Town Geographical Act of 2008. We find this legislation to be unjust and distasteful in its unmistakable intent. It cannot be overstated that this is a clear attempt to remove valuable stakeholders from having a say in the redevelopment plans of properties that they currently own or operate out of. These are not absentee landlords or disreputable business owners — these are valuable members of our community who would love nothing more than to see the Florida Avenue Market area reborn. Revitalization of this area is unequivocally in their best interests.

To provide a little background, we are not some distant group of individuals who have limited interest in seeing this effort succeed. Rather, our neighborhood association represents residents that live immediately to south of the Florida Avenue Market area — our neighborhood spans an area from the railroad tracks on the West to 8th Street on the east and from G Street on the south all the way up to Florida Avenue on the north. Our residents live closer to the Florida Avenue Market than any other residents in the District including all of those in Ward 5. We bring this up to emphasize the direct impact that this development will have on our members. While we are eagerly anticipating the revitalization of this area, we are extremely concerned that a short-sighted redevelopment plan would impair the long-term potential of this unique area.

The Florida Avenue Market area is not just some wide swath of land that has been allowed to languish. As you probably know, this area is home to an amazing collection of merchants and brings in customers from all over. People come from many parts of the District and Maryland and Virginia to shop here — the unique collection of international wholesale food merchants cannot be found in any other area of DC. That makes the Florida Avenue Market area a unique destination and a unique source of revenue. Any redevelopment effort that does not preserve this unique aspect is shortsighted at best and would most likely serve to cost the District millions of dollars in lost future revenue for decades to come. This area needs a proven lead developer that can come in and build on that character and take advantage of those special qualities that that Florida Avenue Market enjoys.

This is not to say that the current market is not without obvious blemishes — it is an area in desperate need of a complete facelift. But that facelift should be based on a plan with a vision, not a plan based on speed. And make no mistake about it, this legislation is being rushed through for no better reason than to get something, anything, in place before the looming possibility that District financial officers may seek to limit the outlay of funds that possibly ought not be spent in the first place. If taxpayer money is going to help fund a redevelopment effort, then at least we should expect to get the most we can for our money. A second-rate development effort with little or no oversight that does not address the concerns of the very people who would be most impacted by it is certainly not the answer.

As you may have gathered, the Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association feels that the New Town Development team in its current form is not the best choice for this project. You may ask why we feel this way. First, there is little or no oversight to ensure that the developers will design a solution that is in the area's best interests. The New Town proposal is dangerous in that it continues an effort to hand a single developer a huge area of property with little or no enforceable guidelines. Further, despite what some have contended here, the selection process and deal-making have been anything but open. These deals are questionable for many reasons, the least of which is that it excuses the government from protecting the interests of the very residents it is supposed to serve. We the citizens have a right to demand that our representatives look after our best interests. Relinquishing that oversight is inexcusable.

Second, the New Town developers have no track record whatsoever. This project seems to be a case of "any development is good development" and that is terrible policy. A prime example that shows that that kind of policy does not work is the Rhode Island Place Shopping Center which sits right outside of the Rhode Island Avenue Metro Station and is just a few miles away. That piece of property which is roughly the same size as Florida Avenue Market is home to a strip mall that is terribly underutilized. Even though it sits right beside a Metro stop, it draws in no one outside of the local area. The parking lot is a veritable wasteland that lies between three name brand stores (Home Depot, Giant and TJ Maxx). When that property was first developed, the hopes were that it would draw in shoppers from many corners of the city. Instead it sits as a testament to short-sighted planning.

As I mentioned, there is nothing in that development that makes it a destination for anyone outside of the area. The Florida Avenue Market, on the other hand, is already a destination that draws in people from all over DC and Maryland and Virginia on a regular basis. Any redevelopment that tramples over the rights of the unique merchants who do business there would result in significant lost revenue and business opportunity. And even though the New Town Developers claim to have those merchants in mind, they have done little to include them in their designs and to curry their favor. Instead of including them throughout the process, they have ignored all but a select few of the largest merchants essentially saying the rest of the merchants are an afterthought, that they add little value. That kind of attitude is not what we need here. The New Town Development team is excluding the very business owners that have the ties to customers outside of the area. Their excuses for excluding them from the redevelopment plan shows a marked lack of business planning and only undermines the relationships needed to ensure a successful revitalization, one which preserves the unique flavor of businesses that could make this turnaround a wild success.

Finally, this legislation marks an irrefutable attempt to undermine the legitimate interests of legitimate land owners and existing businesses who have had long term ties to this area. That is not only shady, it is out-and-out wrong. The other stakeholders deserve a seat at the table in the planning process. If these other stakeholders were not attempting to work with the New Town Development team, that would be one thing, but this is clearly not the case. Rather, these stakeholders that would be cut out by this proposed legislation not only have a keen interest is having this area succeed, they appear to be the only ones who are actually putting forth the most thoughtful ideas for making it great. This area needs a united vision, not a disjointed solution. The process so far is almost unfathomable.

Because of all of this, we ask you to oppose this legislation and this plan as it now stands -- it is clearly detrimental to the best interests of the local residents, the existing businesses and the District of Columbia as a whole.

Thank you very much on behalf of the Steering Committee of the Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association.

The first "official" general meeting of the Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association was held on October 23rd at the Senate Square Building. CHNNA was pleased to get the process under way and we look forward to making a real impact in our community. The agenda included the following:

• Welcome
• Introduction of 2008-09 Steering Committee
• Greetings from Tommy Well's Office
• Benefits of Community Organizing
• Proposed Projects
• Description of Committees
• Invitation to Join Committees
• Updates on Hot Topics
• Upcoming Elections
• Budget / Dues

While much of the inaugural meeting focused on the business of building the organization, we expect future meetings to be much more geared towards tangible activities.

This is where any notes regarding the H Street Festival would go.

The following letter was submitted to the DC Alcoholic Beverage Control Board regarding the possible re-opening of Oasis Liquors:

My name is Cheryl Grant and I live at [address omitted], Washington, DC 20002. I am a founding member and 2008 Chairperson-elect of the Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association (CHNNA). On behalf of CHNNA, I use this letter to assert that CHNNA takes a position of protest to the re-opening of Oasis Liquors addressed at 1179 3rd Street, NE and owned by Mr. Joe Park with liquor license held by Mikyung Yook. I am the designated representative for this protest.

CHNNA is a duly incorporated citizen's association in the District of Columbia with a resident base within the boundaries of Florida Avenue, NE, G Street, NE, 8th Street, NE and the railroad tracks. Membership in CHNNA is open to all residents who reside within these boundaries. The decision of CHNNA to take this official position of protest as a citizen's association is in accordance with our association's articles of incorporation and bylaws and was discussed at a neighborhood meeting duly noticed on July 12, 2008 and commenced on July 22, 2008, held at Two Rivers Public Charter School, 1227 4th Street, NE from 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm.

The grounds for this position of protest by CHNNA are the following:

1. Adverse impact on the peace, quiet, and order of our neighborhood
2. Adverse impact on real property values, and
3. Adverse impact on residential parking needs and vehicular and pedestrian safety.

As a neighborhood association invested in the welfare and well being of our community we value this opportunity to maintain a positive stake in our neighborhood's prosperity. We thank you for providing this forum to address our concerns.

CHNNA held a joint meeting with ANC 6C04 Commissioner Anne Phelps to address how to respond to the prospect of Oasis Liquors reopening. Oasis Liquors has been closed for some time now and they have recently applied to resume operations in the very near future. However, before they can reopen, there must be a public hearing before the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board. As a community organization, CHNNA has standing in the review process. To that end, we deemed it appropriate to hold a special meeting to address the issue. Commissioner Phelps coordinated and led the meeting and was able to get the proprietors (building owner and previous licensee Mr. Joe Park, new license applicant Mikyung Yoon, and her husband/proposed general manager Mr. Si Kay [spelling unknown]) of the former and prospective Oasis Liquors to show up and address community concerns. The owners / operators were present to answer and address the concerns of everyone who came to the meeting (approximately 50 - 60 residents attended).

The following is a summary of some of the discussion that took place at this meeting:

Owners

The owners / proprietors stated that they consider themselves to be "civic minded" and they said they were willing to enter into a voluntary agreement to address concerns of the community. Some long-time residents even indicated that they had little concerns about the possible return of Oasis Liquors — they portrayed the owner (Mr. Park) as a good neighbor and stated that they never had issues in the past. They noted that Oasis Liquors was not touched during the riots from long ago. When other residents questioned their dedication to the area, the owners stated that they lived in DC, although not here in this area.

Prior Operations

Although Oasis Liquors had been open for much longer, it had been owned and operated by Mr. Park starting in 1986. One resident noted that they believed the store had only been robbed one time, and that was back in 60s before Mr. Park was the owner.

Store Operations

The proprietors indicated that they are planning to reopen this establishment as a Liquor / Convenience Store. They stated that they do not plan to sell "singles". The store is scheduled to be open from 9am to 9pm Monday thru Thursday and from 9am to 10pm on Friday and Saturday. They indicated that Oasis Liquors has applied for or already has the following licenses:

• liquor
• food products
• "pet" medicine (over-the-counter cold medicine, pain relievers, etc.)
• lottery tickets
• cigarettes

The owners / operators expect to carry 600 sq. ft. worth of convenience food items in their approximately 900 sq. ft. building and they expect roughly a 50-50 mix of food and alcohol within their store. Further, the owners indicated that they are in negotiations with the Florida Market to carry some fresh produce. Some residents were eager for a new convenience store in the area, noting that it would be especially helpful to local elderly residents. Mr. Park said that he had canvassed the neighborhood and claimed he had 100 people who were in favor of him reopening. When the owners were asked if they had ever considered just opening as a convenience store without carrying alcohol, they indicated that they had not and stated that the store had had been approved by zoning to be a liquor store.

Safety Concerns

Mr. Park and Mr. Kay stated that they are putting in two surveillance cameras that will be monitored regularly by the owners. Mr. Kay also stated that he will keep a running 3 days record of all videotape (possibly longer). They stated that they were committed to safety for all and to maintaining a clean environment and to being good neighbors.

Property Renovation

The owners stated that they have a plan to clean up / upgrade / improve the exterior of the building. They stated that they either have removed or will soon remove all of the pay telephones, vending machines and billboards. The owners also stated that they were looking into the possibility of expanding the size of the store -- they stated that they were working with DCRA zoning to see what could be done. They also stated that they will be painting the exterior of the building.

ABRA Liquor License

Oasis Liquors is seeking to renew their ABC Class A license (a Class A license allows them to sell beer, wine and liquor).

DCRA Permits

They stated that they have now filed their renovation plans and that those plans were approved by DCRA and that they have the proper permits, so work can continue. They did not have those plans with them and many residents were skeptical the site could accommodate all that the owners promised.

DCRA Zoning

They did not have those After the presentation and departure of the owners, Anne noted that, besides the liquor license, there is also the issue of zoning. The parcel is currently zoned "residential," although it had been operating under a pre-existing nonconforming use exemption. However, DC zoning regulations state that if there is a discontinuance for any reason that lasts more than three years, the exemption lapses and the property is supposed to return to the current zoning (in this case, residential). Since it appears that Oasis Liquors has not been in operation for more than 36 months, a protest could be made with DCRA to prohibit the commercial resumption on that property. Oasis Liquors may have the right to request an appeal to reinstitute the exemption.

Resident Concerns

Residnet concerns included, bt were not limited to, the following:

• Alcohol vs. Convenience food items -- Residents expressed more concern about the percentage of items sold (food vs. alcohol) rather sq. footage of space dedicated to items. One resident noted that she had noticed that the shelves were already full of liquor.
• Targeted Alcohol Products -- Other residents were concerned about the size of liquor bottles being sold -- if the store were to sell primarily half pints, that would tend to indicate that the clientèle is more likely to be consuming the alcohol immediately which often leads to problems for local residents. Mr. Park stated that he will abide by all applicable laws including possible limitations on half pints, single sales, etc.
• Property Grounds -- Other residents expressed concerns about the likely clientèle and noted that they were especially concerned about people loitering on or around the property and urinating in nearby alleys.
• Ambiance -- Another concern was the installation of Plexiglas in that people associate Plexiglas with dangerous areas. Mr. Kay stated that the Plexiglas was needed for his safety -- he stated that he has a family that needs him, so he cannot afford to put his own life at risk. Mr. Park noted that Plexiglas has been shown to reduce burglaries in the past.
• Name -- Some attendees expressed concern over the name of the establishment -- Oasis Liquor gives the impression that this is more of a liquor store rather than a convenience store. If the name were changed to Oasis Market, for example, that might make residents more likely to purchase convenience items, thereby reducing the problems that often follow corner liquor stores. It was noted that a name change would require additional paperwork, but this was not thought to require an intensive effort.
• Parking -- One resident was concerned about with how the store would affect parking, especially how delivery trucks will be handled.
• Violence -- Some residents expressed concern about liquor stores in general sometimes leading to increased violence in the surrounding areas.

When asked what residents would prefer instead of a liquor store, residents expressed preference for (1) a true convenience store, (2) the property to be converted into a residential property (as it is zoned), or (3) for the store to focus more on fresh produce.

ANC Direction

Anne informed the group that the ANC had already approved the hiring of an attorney to help with the protest and/or voluntary agreement. She stated that the ANC almost always files a protest because it grants them leverage to ensure that their concerns are addressed prior to a new business opening. A properly-filed protest allows the protestant(s) a place at the table in the license renewal process, including, if desired, the negotiation for a cooperative/voluntary agreement.

ABRA Process

Anne noted that the deadline to file a petition to protest the license is August 4, 2008 and the roll call hearing is scheduled for August 18, 2008. In order to be recognized at the roll call hearing, a minimum of 5 people must show up. Anne also noted that, in the event of a protest, ABRA will ask the two sides to meet with a mediator to try to hash out differences (note that mediators are provided by ABRA). Any Voluntary Agreement that is agreed upon would then get attached to the license and agreement's provisions should include appropriate recourse. If they then broke the voluntary agreement, the regulations state that the proprietors would then have a limited time to cure the problem (and Anne expressed a preference to limit the time to cure to 15 days to ensure that problems are addressed efficiently). Recourse could include fines or even the revocation of the license. Those stipulations would have to be worked out. Anne also noted that the protests are typically rescinded once a voluntary agreement is put in place. Anne also noted that she did not know if stipulations related to product other than alcoholic beverages would be upheld or enforced; she is going to check with ABC about this.

Course of Action

A vote was taken with those still in attendance to gauge the sentiment as to how to proceed with Oasis Liquors. Three options were given -- (1) allow Oasis to open as the owners see fit with no protest being filed and no voluntary agreement being sought, (2) protest the application with the intent to pursue a voluntary agreement, (3) protest with the goal of preventing the establishment from reopening as a liquor store. The result of the vote was:

1. No protest: 0
2. Pursue Voluntary Agreement: 23
3. Protest to Halt Liquor License Entirely: 9

1st Topic — Articles of Incorporation

Discussion — It was announced that the Articles of Incorporation were filed on June 13, 2008.

Action — Survey results will be reported at the next meeting.

2nd Topic — Election of Officers

All officer candidates present were invited to speak in front of the Assembly. For those officer candidates who were not present at the meeting, a representative read their prospective officer candidate form. The Assembly voted and the following are the new officers of the CHNNA:

• Chairman: Cheryl Grant
• Vice Chairman: Tom Madison
• Secretary: Dan Curry
• Treasurer: Tim Armstrong
• At-Large Delegates: Rachel Hall, Tanetta Isler, Jeffrey King, and Briant Stringham

Action — All officers will meet at the next steering committee meeting in August with the members of the Formation Committee to turn over leadership. There were no candidates for the General Counsel position, so a special election will be held at the September meeting.

3rd Topic — Other Ways for Members to Get Involved

Discussion — Cheryl Grant offered a description of the activities of the Naming Committee and the process enacted to review and then select a name recommendation to the Formation Committee. A listing of all names in consideration was provided along with some historical highlights and categorical information provided as to relevance/connection to existing names with the city's recognized entities. The name formally recommended by the Naming Committee to the Formation Committee was "Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association" or "CHNNA". This recommendation was accepted by the Formation Committee in May 2008 as the official name of the community association.

Action — Members who want to be block captains should email CHNNA08@gmail.com. The newly elected officers will identify standing committees and announce those at the September meeting.

4th Topic — By-laws

Discussion — The by-laws that were drafted by the By-Law Committee and accepted by the Formation Committee were reviewed and voted on.

Action — The majority of the members present at the meeting voted to accept the by-laws as written.

5th Topic — Membership Dues

Discussion — Dues for the first official fiscal year were discussed.

Action — A membership dues committee was formed to come up with a recommendation for dues and present their recommendation at the August Steering Committee meeting for vote.

Other Agenda Items

Discussion — Updates were provided by ANC 6CO4 Commissioner Anne Phelps and ANC 6C04 Commissioner Tony Richardson.

1st Topic — Selection of the name "Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association"

Discussion — Cheryl Grant offered a description of the activities of the Naming Committee and the process enacted to review and then select a name recommendation to the Formation Committee. A listing of all names in consideration was provided along with some historical highlights and categorical information provided as to relevance/connection to existing names with the city's recognized entities. The name formally recommended by the Naming Committee to the Formation Committee was "Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association" or "CHNNA". This recommendation was accepted by the Formation Committee in May 2008 as the official name of the community association.

2nd Topic — Selection of the identified association boundaries of 8th Street, NE, Florida Avenue, NE, G Street, NE and the railroad tracks

Discussion — Cheryl Grant provided an overview of the initial proposed boundaries and the work of the Boundary Committee to consider these and any other boundaries offered to define the neighborhood area covered by the community association. Slides offering graphics of identified areas of consideration were summarized. The boundary formally recommended by the Boundary Committee to the Formation Committee was 8th Street, NE, Florida Avenue, NE, Street, NE and the railroad tracks. This recommendation was accepted by the Formation Committee in May 2008 as the official boundary for neighborhood area covered by the community association.

3rd Topic — Google Groups and Joining the ListServ

Discussion — Trista Etzig gave a detailed walk through of how to join Google groups and explained the essentials of following a dual process for being on the email listing. She also provided an overview of navigating the site to access the available information. Several of those in attendance had inquiries about joining Google groups and Trista Etzig and Tom Madison provided clarity using available slides for demonstration.

4th Topic — Introduction of Upcoming Election Process for Officers of The Association

Discussion — Tom Madison provided a break down of the Steering Committee and the Officer positions for The Association and handed out the Officer Candidate Forms for those in attendance. Rachel Hall inquired of the given term for any elected position. Tom Madison and Ben Hayes offered more detail and described the position of Treasurer which would not be term limited. Another person in attendance asked about doing background checks or credit checks for those elected. Tom Madison and Ben Hayes provided feedback regarding the limitations of such checks and the possible backlash of undertaking such an investigative effort for officers in a small community organizing effort. Another participant, Ladeda, inquired as to why so many groups in DC are working on the same community issues and seemed to have confusion over the workings of a neighborhood community group vs. a DC government operative unit. Another participant inquired as to how our community association would be different from a homeowners association. Trista Etzig and Cheryl Grant provided clarity on this point, describing the power as well as the limits of a community organized group. Also, Charles Mason, an elected DC official provided clarity on the differences on what elected officials do and the workings of community groups. He also strongly encouraged every person in attendance to get on board and active with the community association. He also handed out his business cards and shared his telephone number and encouraged calls for him to assist on community issues. During this time, Tom Madison announced and circulated the sheet requesting Block Captains to serve as spokespersons for the Association on their block.

5th Topic — Filling Steps

Discussion — Tom Madison provided an overview of the filling steps for a non-profit tax-exempt charity as well as the upcoming deadlines targeted for these action items. Tom shared that the goal is to file by the end of June.

6th Topic — Google Groups and Joining the ListServ

Discussion — Ben Hayes gave a detailed review of the proposed By-laws of the association. These by-laws will define the organization and how it operates. He described the types of membership, the structure of the Steering Committee, the duties of the various positions, the proposed schedule of meetings and the reasoning behind it. Ben also delved into the financial matters and explained the mechanism of checks and balances whereby the organization has both a treasurer and an audit committee. Then he described the proposed fiscal year and the upcoming elections rules and process.

7th Topic — Introduction of Tony Richards, newly elected for replacement of Alan Kimber for ANC605

Discussion — Tony Richards introduced himself to the group describing his history with community involvement and his excitement about undertaking the position of ANC605. He encouraged everyone to be active with the association. He also provided his website of www.votetonyrich.org. From his sharing and enthusiasm, one participant stated she had an issue with repairs needed on her home. Tom Madison offered his ideology that such problems are just what a community association is available for. Cheryl Grant also offered some anecdotal evidence of how neighbors working together can combat crime on their block. Another participant shared that she is looking forward to an association helping to grow unity in the community and shared her name and asked that we all stand and share our name and what street we live on with the group to start this effort. Another resident, Brad Davis @ 1123 7th Street NE offered his services of trash removal to assist neighbors. Another resident Rafaella Marshall stated that she wants the association to look into the money received by churches in our community as possible resources for the association. A final member asked for the association to formulate a listing of available resources of organization and individuals in the community to provide the aforementioned and other available resources for our community.

1st Topic — History of Formation, Naming, and Proposed Boundaries of the Association

Discussion — The current Association name "Capitol Hill North" was discussed as well as several other possible names and current proposed boundaries were reviewed. A discussion ensued regarding the historical significance of the Capitol Hill North name of the Association and other possible names. A long time resident of the neighborhood mentioned that Capitol Hill North was an appropriate name that dates back to the 1800's for our area. It was also recommended that the Association boundary on the west go to 8th St. NE, instead of 7th St. NE.

Action — It was decided that a naming committee and a boundary committee would be formed and meet within the next three weeks to recommend an association name and boundaries at the next meeting. All meeting attendees were asked to indicate if they wanted to be part of either of these committees on their neighborhood surveys.

2nd Topic — Neighborhood Survey

Discussion — All meeting participants were asked to complete a neighborhood survey rating some of their concerns or problems that the Association can work to address. It was asked that the surveys be handed in before leaving.

Action — Survey results will be reported at the next meeting.

3rd Topic — Filing Steps

Discussion — The steps to file for a non–profit tax–exempt public charity status were discussed. In order to receive grants and solicit dues and donations, we must file articles of incorporation, finalize by–laws, file for tax–exempt status (501(c)(3)), and establish a bank account. A draft of the Association by–laws has been completed.

Action — A meeting participant who has non–profit legal experience volunteered to help direct the filing process. It was decided that a by–law/501(c)(3) filing committee would be formed and meet within the next three weeks to finalize the by–laws. All meeting participants were asked to indicate on their neighborhood surveys if they wanted to be part of this committee.

4th Topic — How can everyone participate in the Association?

Discussion — Participation in the Association as a resident member, associate member, officer, member of a standing committee, delegate, and block captain were discussed.

Action — All meeting participants were asked to indicate how they wanted to participate in the association on their neighborhood surveys. In a future meeting, officers will be nominated and elected and committees will be established.

Other Agenda Items

Our next steps will be to look for free meeting space within the Association boundaries, but in the meantime, Gallaudet has graciously offered us their auditorium and audio/visual equipment for free. We plan to meet in the next month to review the results from the neighborhood survey, discuss the next steps in filing the bylaws, the application, and the 501(c)(3) application, review the recommendations of the Naming and Boundaries committees, and discuss nominations and the election process.

Updates were provided on NoMA BID by Elizabeth Price, President of NoMa BID, ANC 6CO4 by Anne Phelps, ANC 6C04 Commissioner, ANC 6C05 by Rachael Hall.

Other groups were invited to speak. The H St. Community Market and Parker Street groups provided updates