DC Government

Photo by PoPville flickr user pablo.raw

From DDOT:

The full DC Snow Team is deploying today, applying salt to major roadways and residential streets, as needed. The District also will move rush-hour traffic signal timing up to begin at 1 pm to facilitate the movement of traffic as employees leave work earlier to reach their destination before conditions can hamper travel.

The weather forecast is for rain and snow, becoming all snow after 4pm and a high temperature near 41F. Less than half an inch of snow is predicted to fall during the day, but snow is likely to continue falling until 9 pm tonight and perhaps another half inch of snow is possible.

The District Snow Team had more than 180 plows on their routes at 11 am today. These crews will work through the night, into tomorrow morning’s rush hour.

Motorists are reminded to drive carefully on wet roadways and give the snow plows ample room to work. Other safety tips for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists can be found at www.snow.dc.gov.

From an email:

“If you want to get your taxes done for free and made $50,000 or less in 2011 see the attached PDF.”

VITA_Free Tax

Photo by PoPville flickr user hellomarkers!

From the Washington Post:

“Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D) said Friday he wants to set red and white as the uniform color of all city taxi cabs so they meld with the color of the DC Circulator and Metro buses.”

Even though more people voted for yellow – do you like the idea of red and white so it will “meld” with the color of DC Circulator and metro buses?

Photo by PoPville flickr user [F]oxymoron

Dear PoPville,

I received a parking ticket on September 3, 2011 at 3:23 am in a residential parking zone in front of my house . The original violation was “fail prop affix stk”. I requested a hearing by mail with evidence to support my case. On January 12, 2012, I finally received a ruling by mail. The letter states that I am liable for “obstruction of tags”. This is a totally different violation. I immediately checked the ticket number and it was the same. Somehow during the process of requesting a hearing by the mail the original violation was changed in error. On January 13, 2012, I made a trip to adjudication services to ask that violation be reversed. After an hour, I was told that no one there had the authority to reverse the ruling and that only the hearing examiner can reverse the ruling, even if it was in error. I was told to write a hand written note to the hearing examiner asking for reconsideration. According to the letter I received, I must pay the $50 ticket by February 5th to avoid tags my being suspended.

What recourse do I have here? Right now I’m waiting to hear back from a hearing examiner that may or may not have received my hand written note. I have already written my council person. I am wondering if any of your reader have any suggestions. Has this happened to anyone else?

I needed a smile after reading the heartbreaking story of Gisele. Thanks to a couple of readers for sending in some good stuff from around town.

Photo by PoPville flickr user ekelly80

Dear PoPville,

i can’t possibly be the only person to have recently been slammed with several hundred dollars worth of citations from the new speed camera on the 7700 block of 16th street.

from mpdc’s website:
“Will warning tickets be issued?

Warning tickets from the mobile photo radar vehicles were issued in July 2001, as part of an initial 30-day period of public education. Since then, the mobile cameras have issued actual NOIs. As new photo radar applications are implemented – for example, fixed-camera or work zone locations – warning tickets only will be issued for 30 days.”

this implies that a newly installed fixed camera requires a 30 day period during which warnings will be issued for violations, rather than citations. i’ve been in contact with muriel bowser’s office over the past week, attempting to find out the date the camera was installed. mpd seems to be claiming that the warning period took place in 2007, when a temporary, non-fixed camera was at that location. i find it unreasonable that a warning period five years ago be considered a legitimate “warning” that should cover the current camera installation.

i get the sense that the person i’ve been communicating with in muriel bowser’s office does want to help, but she has thus far been unable to find out the precise date the camera was installed. i am perfectly capable of being a nuisance all on my own, but since i personally know
several other people who have been affected, it stands to reason that this is a pretty widespread issue.