[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13191-13194]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          2004 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OMNIBUS AUTHORIZATION ACT

  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (H.R. 3797) to authorize improvements in the operations 
of the government of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3797

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``2004 District of Columbia 
     Omnibus Authorization Act''.

     SEC. 2. REQUIRING SUBMISSION OF PLAN BY SCHOOL BOARD FOR 
                   ALLOCATION OF FUNDS UNDER MAYOR'S PROPOSED 
                   BUDGET.

       Section 452 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (sec. 
     1-204.52, D.C. Official Code) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``With respect to'' 
     and inserting ``(a) Role of Mayor and Council.--With respect 
     to'';
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``This section'' 
     and inserting ``This subsection''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Plan for Allocation of Funds Under Proposed Budget.--
       ``(1) Submission of plan to council.--Not later than March 
     1 of each year or the date on which the Mayor makes the 
     proposed annual budget for a year available under section 442 
     (whichever occurs later), the Board of Education shall submit 
     to the Council a plan for the allocation of the Mayor's 
     proposed budget among various object classes and 
     responsibility centers (as defined under regulations of the 
     Board).

[[Page 13192]]

       ``(2) Contents.--The plan submitted under this subsection 
     shall include a detailed presentation of how much money will 
     be allocated to each school, including--
       ``(A) a specific description of the amount of funds 
     available to the school for which spending decisions are 
     under the control of the school; and
       ``(B) a specific description of other responsibility center 
     funds which will be spent in a manner directly benefiting the 
     school, including funds which will be spent for personnel, 
     equipment and supplies, property maintenance, and student 
     services.''.

     SEC. 3. MULTIYEAR CONTRACTING AUTHORITY AND LEASING 
                   AGREEMENTS FOR DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS.

       (a) Authority.--Subchapter III of chapter 17 of title 11, 
     District of Columbia Code, is amended by inserting after 
     section 11-1742 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 11-1742a. Multiyear contracting authority and leasing 
       agreements

       ``(a) Severable Services Contracts for Periods Crossing 
     Fiscal Years.--The Executive Officer may enter into a 
     contract for procurement of severable services in the same 
     manner and to the same extent as the head of an executive 
     agency may enter into such a contract under section 303L of 
     title III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services 
     Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 253l).
       ``(b) Multiyear Leasing Agreements.--
       ``(1) Authority.--The Executive Officer may enter into a 
     lease agreement for the accommodation of the District of 
     Columbia courts in a building which is in existence or being 
     erected by the lessor to accommodate the District of Columbia 
     courts.
       ``(2) Terms.--A lease agreement under this subsection shall 
     be on terms the Executive Officer considers to be in the 
     interest of the Federal Government and the District of 
     Columbia and necessary for the accommodation of the District 
     of Columbia courts. However, the lease agreement may not bind 
     the District of Columbia courts for more than 10 years and 
     the obligation of amounts for a lease under this subsection 
     is limited to the current fiscal year for which payments are 
     due without regard to section 1341(a)(1)(B) of title 31, 
     United States Code.
       ``(c) Multiyear Contracts.--
       ``(1) Authority.--The Executive Officer may enter into a 
     multiyear contract for the acquisition of property or 
     services in the same manner and to the same extent as an 
     executive agency may enter into such a contract under section 
     304B of title III of the Federal Property and Administrative 
     Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 254c). In applying such 
     authority--
       ``(A) in section 304B(a)(2)(B)--
       ``(i) `the best interests of the District of Columbia and 
     the Federal Government' shall be substituted for `the best 
     interests of the United States'; and
       ``(ii) `the courts' programs' shall be substituted for `the 
     agency's programs';
       ``(B) the second sentence of section 304B(b), and 
     subsection (e), shall not apply; and
       ``(C) in section 304B(c), `$5,000,000' shall be substituted 
     for `$10,000,000'.
       ``(2) Cancellation or termination for insufficient funding 
     after first year.--In the event that funds are not made 
     available for the continuation of a multiyear contract for 
     services into a subsequent fiscal year, the contract shall be 
     canceled or terminated, and the costs of cancellation or 
     termination may be paid from--
       ``(A) appropriations originally available for the 
     performance of the contract concerned;
       ``(B) appropriations currently available for procurement of 
     the type of services concerned, and not otherwise obligated; 
     or
       ``(C) funds appropriated for those payments.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     subchapter III of chapter 17 of title 11, District of 
     Columbia Code, is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to section 11-1742 the following new item:

``11-1742a. Multiyear contracting authority and leasing agreements.''.

     SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF ACADEMIC YEAR AS FISCAL YEAR FOR 
                   DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SCHOOLS.

       Section 441 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (sec. 
     1-204.41, D.C. Official Code) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``The fiscal year'' 
     and inserting ``(a) In General.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (b), the fiscal year'';
       (2) by striking the third sentence; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Exceptions.--
       ``(1) Armory board.--The fiscal year for the Armory Board 
     shall begin on the first day of January and shall end on the 
     thirty-first day of December of each calendar year.
       ``(2) Schools.--Effective with respect to fiscal year 2007 
     and each succeeding fiscal year, the fiscal year for the 
     District of Columbia Public Schools (including public charter 
     schools) and the University of the District of Columbia shall 
     begin on the first day of July and end on the thirtieth day 
     of June of each calendar year.''.

     SEC. 5. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR COUNCIL TO ADOPT BUDGET TO 
                   ACCOUNT FOR DAYS OF RECESS.

       Section 446(a) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act 
     (sec. 1-204.46(a), D.C. Official Code), as amended by section 
     101(a), is amended by striking ``50 calendar days'' and 
     inserting ``56 calendar days''.

     SEC. 6. EXEMPTION OF DISTRICT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES ON 
                   COMPRESSED SCHEDULE FROM FEDERAL OVERTIME 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act 
     (29 U.S.C. 207) shall not apply to the hours of an employee 
     of the District of Columbia government which constitute a 
     compressed schedule.
       (b) Compressed Schedule Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``compressed schedule'' means--
       (1) in the case of a full-time employee, an 80-hour 
     biweekly basic work requirement which is scheduled for less 
     than 10 workdays, and
       (2) in the case of a part-time employee, a biweekly basic 
     work requirement of less than 80 hours which is scheduled for 
     less than 10 workdays.
       (c) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect 
     to hours occurring on or after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.

     SEC. 7. AVAILABILITY OF ENFORCED ANNUAL LEAVE OR ENFORCED 
                   LEAVE WITHOUT PAY AS DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR 
                   CORPORATION COUNSEL ATTORNEYS.

       (a) In General.--Section 856(a) of the District of Columbia 
     Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 (sec. 1-
     608.56(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking ``or 
     reduction in grade,'' and inserting ``reduction in grade, or 
     the placing of such attorney on enforced annual leave or 
     enforced leave without pay,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 8. REGULATION OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BANKS BY FEDERAL 
                   DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION.

       (a) Federal Deposit Insurance Act.--(1) Section 3 of the 
     Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(1)(A), by striking ``, State bank, 
     and District bank'' and inserting ``and State bank'';
       (B) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (4);
       (C) in subsection (q)(1), by striking ``, any District 
     bank,'';
       (D) in subsection (q)(2)(A), by striking ``(except a 
     District bank)''; and
       (E) in subsection (q)(3), by striking ``(except a District 
     bank),''.
       (2) Section 7(a)(1) of such Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(a)(1)) is 
     amended by striking ``(except a District bank)''.
       (3) Section 10(b)(2)(A) of such Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1820(b)(2)(A)) is amended by striking ``(except a District 
     bank)''.
       (4) Section 11 of such Act (12 U.S.C. 1821) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (c)(2)(A)(i), by striking ``or District 
     bank'';
       (B) in subsection (c)(2)(A)(ii)--
       (i) by striking ``or District bank''; and
       (ii) by striking `` or the code of law for the District of 
     Columbia''; and
       (C) in subsection (c)(3)(A), by striking ``(other than a 
     District depository institution)''.
       (5) Section 18 of such Act (12 U.S.C. 1828) is amended--
       (A) in section (c)(2)(A), by striking ``or a District 
     bank'';
       (B) in subsection (c)(2)(B), by striking ``(except a 
     District bank)'';
       (C) in subsection (c)(2)(C), by striking ``a District Bank 
     or'';
       (D) in subsection (d)(1), by striking ``(except a District 
     bank)'' each place such term appears;
       (E) in subsection (f), by striking ``or a District bank'';
       (F) in subsection (i)(1), by striking ``(except a District 
     bank)'';
       (G) in subsection (i)(2), by striking subparagraph (A) and 
     by redesignating subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D) as 
     subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively;
       (H) in subsection (i)(2)(A) (as so redesignated by 
     subparagraph (G)), by striking ``(except a District bank)''; 
     and
       (I) in subsection (i)(2)(B) (as so redesignated by 
     subparagraph (G)), by striking ``(except a District bank)''.
       (b) National Housing Act.--Section 203(s)(5) of the 
     National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1709(s)(5)) is amended by 
     striking ``or District bank''.
       (c) Bank Holding Company Act.--The Bank Holding Company Act 
     of 1956 is amended--
       (1) in section 2(c) (12 U.S.C. 1841(c)), by striking 
     paragraph (3); and
       (2) in section 3(b)(1) (12 U.S.C. 1842(b)(1)), by striking 
     ``or a District bank''.
       (d) Bank Protection Act of 1968.--Section 2(1) of the Bank 
     Protection Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. 1881(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``and district banks''.
       (e) Depository Institution Management Interlocks Act.--The 
     Depository Institution Management Interlocks Act (12 U.S.C. 
     3201 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 207(1), by striking ``and banks located in 
     the District of Columbia''; and
       (2) in section 209(1), by striking ``and banks located in 
     the District of Columbia''.
       (f) Securities Exchange Act of 1934.--The Securities 
     Exchange Act of 1934 is amended--
       (1) in section 3(a)(34) (15 U.S.C. 78c(34)), by striking 
     ``or a bank operating under the Code

[[Page 13193]]

     of Law for the District of Columbia'' each place such term 
     appears in clause (i) of subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), (D), 
     and (F);
       (2) in section 3(a)(34)(G)(i) (15 U.S.C. 78c(34)(G)(i)), by 
     striking ``, a bank in the District of Columbia examined by 
     the Comptroller of the Currency,'';
       (3) in section 3(a)(34)(H)(i) (15 U.S.C. 78c(34)(H)(i)), by 
     striking `` or a bank in the District of Columbia examined by 
     the Comptroller of the Currency'';
       (4) in section 12(i)(1) (15 U.S.C. 78l(i)(1)), by striking 
     ``and banks operating under the Code of Law for the District 
     of Columbia'';
       (5) in section 17(f)(4)(A) (15 U.S.C. 78q(f)(4)(A)), by 
     striking ``and banks operating under the Code of Law for the 
     District of Columbia''; and
       (6) in section 17(f)(4)(B) (15 U.S.C. 78q(f)(4)(B)), by 
     striking ``or a bank operating under the Code of Law for the 
     District of Columbia''.
       (g) National Bank Receivership Act.--The National Bank 
     Receivership Act is amended by striking section 6.
       (h) Federal Reserve Act.--The last sentence of the 3rd 
     undesignated paragraph of section 9 of the Federal Reserve 
     Act (12 U.S.C. 321) is amended by striking ``(except within 
     the District of Columbia)''.
       (i) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 9. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as otherwise provided, this Act and the amendments 
     made by this Act shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2005 
     and each succeeding fiscal year.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Michigan (Mrs. Miller), and the gentlewoman from the District of 
Columbia (Ms. Norton) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan, Mrs. Miller.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and 
extend their remarks on H.R. 3797, and include extraneous material on 
the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  H.R. 3797, a bill introduced by the chairman of the Committee on 
Government Reform, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), authorizes 
the operations of the District of Columbia government. The bill, the 
first of its kind, actually, provides a vehicle to address necessary 
changes in Federal law pertaining to the District of Columbia. This 
legislation will give the mayor and the city's leadership necessary 
autonomy by allowing them to only have to deal with the House Committee 
of Jurisdiction, the Committee on Government Reform, on changes to 
Federal laws that affect the District.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) and the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for ushering 
H.R. 3797 through the Committee on Government Reform and on to the 
floor today, and I support its passage.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me begin by thanking my friend and colleague on the Committee on 
Government Reform, its chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Davis), for working closely with me in moving H.R. 3797. This 
legislation institutes a new process that will significantly facilitate 
D.C. government operations, promote greater efficiency in Congress by 
conforming the handling of District of Columbia matters to House rules, 
and improve the efficiency of both the House and the District of 
Columbia on these matters.
  This is the first time that the Committee on Government Reform, the 
authorizing committee for District of Columbia matters that must come 
to the Congress, has introduced a bill to enact legislative changes 
that have been passed by the D.C. council, and are here only because 
they require affirmative action by Congress to become law because they 
amend the D.C. Home Rule Act, which can only be amended by the 
Congress.
  Perhaps the most noteworthy provision, in light of recent events, is 
the change in the fiscal year for D.C. public schools and the 
University of the District of Columbia's academic year to conform to 
the school system's new fiscal year. Imagine the difficulties if the 
fiscal year and the academic year are not in tandem, as they have not 
been. The proposed change was already in the bill, but its necessity is 
underlined by the fact that this is one of the changes requested by the 
top candidate for superintendent of the D.C. public schools, Carl 
Cohen.
  Similarly, as requested by the mayor and city council, H.R. 3795 
amends the Home Rule Charter to give the city council and additional 6 
days with which to review the mayor's proposed budget, restoring the 
full 50-day period to the council to allow the D.C. government to use 
compressed schedules in order to exempt employees from Federal overtime 
requirements, to allow the D.C. government to offer enforced annual 
leave, or enforced leave without pay as a disciplinary action for 
corporation counsel attorneys while an investigation is underway for 
alleged misconduct, and to allow oversight of D.C. chartered banks to 
be changed from the U.S. Office of the Comptroller to the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Corporation in order to bring D.C. banking law into 
conformity with what occurs in all 50 States, relieving the current 
regulatory burden that has discouraged the establishment of D.C. 
charter banks.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume to urge all Members to support the passage of H.R. 3797, 
and I also want to thank the chairman of the Committee, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Davis), for his outstanding leadership on this bill. 
It is really of vital importance to our Nation's capital, and I know 
the chairman is always working very hard to address all the challenges 
and concerns of the people of the District.
  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, please include the attached 
exchange of letters between Chairman Michael G. Oxley of the Committee 
on Financial Services, Chairman John A. Boehner of the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce and myself in the Congressional Record at 
the end of the debate on H.R. 3797 under general leave.

                              Committee on Financial Services,

                                    Washington, DC, March 9, 2004.
     Hon. Tom Davis,
     Chairman, Committee on Government Reform, Washington, DC.
       Dear Tom: On February 26, 2004, the Committee on Government 
     Reform ordered reported H.R. 3797, the 2004 District of 
     Columbia Omnibus Authorization Act. As you know, the 
     Committee on Financial Services was granted an additional 
     referral upon the bill's introduction pursuant to the 
     Committee's jurisdiction under Rule X of the Rules of the 
     House of Representatives over banks and banking. Section 8 of 
     the bill addresses the regulation of banks chartered by the 
     District of Columbia by the Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation.
       Because of your willingness to consult with my committee 
     regarding this matter, I will waive consideration of the bill 
     by the Financial Services Committee. By agreeing to waive its 
     consideration of the bill, the Financial Services Committee 
     does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 3797. In addition, 
     the Committee on Financial Services reserves its authority to 
     seek conferees on any provisions of the bill that are within 
     the Financial Services Committee's jurisdiction during any 
     House-Senate conference that may be convened on this 
     legislation. I ask your commitment to support any request by 
     the Committee on Financial Services for conferees on H.R. 
     3797 or related legislation.
       I request that you include this letter and your response as 
     part of your committee's report on the bill and the 
     Congressional Record during consideration of the legislation 
     on the House floor.
       Thank you for your attention to these matters.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Michael G. Oxley,
     Chairman.
                                  ____



                               Committee on Government Reform,

                                    Washington, DC, March 9, 2004.
     Hon. Michael G. Oxley,
     Chairman, Committee on Financial Services, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your recent letter 
     regarding the Financial Services Committee's jurisdictional 
     interest in H.R. 3797, the 2004 District of Columbia 
     Authorization Act. As you have stated, Section 8 regarding 
     the regulation of banks chartered by the District of Columbia 
     by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is within the 
     jurisdiction of your Committee.

[[Page 13194]]

       I agree that the Financial Services Committee does not 
     waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 3797 by waiving further 
     consideration of the bill. In addition, I will support your 
     request for conferees from the Financial Services Committee 
     should a House-Senate conference on this or similar 
     legislation be convened.
       As you have requested, I will include a copy of your letter 
     and this response as part of the Government Reform 
     Committee's report and the Congressional Record during 
     consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank 
     you for your assistance as I work towards the enactment of 
     H.R. 3797.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Tom Davis,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                            Committee on Education


                                            and the Workforce,

                                    Washington, DC, June 17, 2004.
     Hon. Tom Davis,
     Chairman, Committee on Government Reform, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Davis: I am writing to confirm our mutual 
     understanding with respect to consideration of H.R. 3797, the 
     ``2004 District of Columbia Authorization Act,'' which the 
     Committee on Government Reform reported on February 26, 2004. 
     This bill was referred to the Committee on Government Reform, 
     and in addition to the Committees on Education and the 
     Workforce and Financial Services. Section 6, Exemption of 
     District of Columbia Employees on Compressed Schedule from 
     Federal Overtime Requirements, amends the Fair Labor 
     Standards Act and is within the sole jurisdiction of the 
     Committee on Education and the Workforce.
       Given the fact that I support the policy contained in 
     Section 6, I do not intend to ask for continued referral of 
     H.R. 3797, nor will I object to the scheduling of this bill 
     for consideration in the House of Representatives. However, I 
     do so only with the understanding that this procedural route 
     should not be construed to prejudice the Committee on 
     Education and the Workforce's jurisdictional interest and 
     prerogatives on these provisions or any other similar 
     legislation and will not be considered as precedent for 
     consideration of matters of jurisdictional interest to my 
     Committee in the future. Furthermore, should these or similar 
     provisions be considered in a conference with the Senate, I 
     would expect Members of the Committee on Education and the 
     Workforce be appointed to the conference committee on those 
     provisions.
       Finally, I would ask that you include a copy of our 
     exchange of letters on this matter in your report to 
     accompany this bill. If you have questions regarding this 
     matter, please do not hesitate to call me. I thank you for 
     your consideration.
           Sincerely,
                                                  John A. Boehner,
     Chairman.
                                  ____



                               Committee on Government Reform,

                                    Washington, DC, June 17, 2004.
     Hon. John A. Boehner,
     Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your recent letter 
     regarding the Education and the Workforce Committee's 
     jurisdictional interest in H.R. 3797, the 2004 District of 
     Columbia Authorization Act. As you have stated, Section 6 
     exempting certain District of Columbia employees from 
     overtime regulation under the Fair Labor Standards Act is 
     within the jurisdiction of your Committee.
       I agree that the Education and Workforce Committee does not 
     waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 3797 by waiving further 
     consideration of the bill. In addition, I will support your 
     request for conferees from the Government Reform Committee 
     should a House-Senate conference on this or similar 
     legislation be convened.
       As you have requested, I will include a copy of your letter 
     and this response as part of the Government Reform 
     Committee's report and the Congressional Record during 
     consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank 
     you for your assistance as I work towards the enactment of 
     H.R. 3797.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Tom Davis,
                                                         Chairman.

  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3797.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________