Senate Report 109-106 - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2006

[Senate Report 109-106]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

Calendar No. 170
109th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 109-106

======================================================================

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2006

_______

July 21, 2005.--Ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. Brownback, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany S. 1446]

The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the
bill (H.R. 0000) making appropriations for the government of
the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in
whole or in part against the revenues of said District for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes,
reports the same to the Senate with amendments and recommends
that the bill as amended do pass. deg.
The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1446)
making appropriations for the government of the District of
Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part
against the revenues of said District for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes, reports
favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.

Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2006

Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $593,000,000
Amount of 2005 appropriations........................... 555,521,000
Amount of 2006 budget estimate.......................... 573,000,000
Amount of House allowance............................... 603,397,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
2005 appropriations................................. +37,479,000
2006 budget estimate................................ +19,603,000
House allowance..................................... -10,397,000

C O N T E N T S

----------
Page
Summary of Bill.................................................. 3
General Statement................................................ 5
Federal Funds.................................................... 8
General Provisions............................................... 41
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of
the Sen-
ate............................................................ 43
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 43
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 44
Budgetary Impact of Bill......................................... 48

SUMMARY OF BILL

The following discussion of the bill includes general
information on initiatives and concerns of the Committee and an
analysis of the total resources estimated to be available to
the District of Columbia in the coming fiscal year.
The Committee recommendation contains items funded by the
House in a different bill, H.R. 3058. The Committee believes
that it is appropriate to fund these items in this bill. For
ease of comparison, the Committee report sets forth a ``House
allowance'' as if these items had been contained in this bill.
These items were contained in the Transportation, Treasury, the
Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2006 (H.R. 3058), as passed the House, but
were not considered or contained in the Committee
recommendation to the Senate on that bill.

Federal Funds

The Committee considered requests from the President for
Federal funds totaling $573,397,000 in budget authority for the
District of Columbia appropriation. The Committee
recommendation is $593,000,000 and is appropriated as follows:
(1) $33,200,000 for D.C. resident tuition support; (2)
$218,912,000 for the District of Columbia Courts; (3)
$45,000,000 for Defender Services in the District of Columbia
Courts; (4) $201,828,000 for the Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia; (5)
$12,000,000 for security costs related to the presence of the
Federal Government in the District of Columbia; (6) $1,000,000
for transportation assistance; (7) $5,000,000 for the combined
sewer overflow; (8) $16,500,000 for security, economic
development, education and health projects; (9) $3,000,000 for
support of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative; (10)
$40,000,000 for school improvement; (11) $2,000,000 for foster
care improvements; (12) $5,200,000 for a new bioterrorism and
forensics laboratory; (13) $500,000 for the National Guard
Youth Challenge Program; (14) $3,000,000 for Marriage
Development Accounts and marriage strengthening; (15)
$2,000,000 for a Latino youth initiative; and (16) $3,000,000
for prisoner reentrant housing.

District of Columbia Funds

The Committee recommends a total of $8,700,158,000 in
Distrct of Columbia operating funds for fiscal year 2006. This
is the same level of funding requested by the District of
Columbia.

Total Resources Available

Based on recommendations in the bill, a total of
$10,877,356,000 will be available to the District government
during fiscal year 2006. Included in this figure are
appropriations from local funds, Federal grants, Federal
payments, and private and other funds. The financing of the
appropriations from District funds are generated from revenues
from various local taxes, fees, charges, and other collections
received by the District government.

GENERAL STATEMENT

The Committee has included funding for three new Federal-
local initiatives in the District of Columbia. These include:
(1) promoting and sustaining healthy marriages; (2) enhancing
educational and health opportunities for Latino youth; and (3)
reducing prisoner recidivism.
Promoting Healthy Marriages
The Committee understands that most children born and
raised in households where their biological parents are married
are more financially and emotionally stable. As a way to assist
low-income married couples to save money to pay for job
training or education, buy a home or start their own business,
the Committee is providing funds to establish ``Marriage
Development Accounts'' [MDAs] in the District of Columbia. MDAs
will be available to married couples who are citizens or legal
residents of the District of Columbia whose Federal adjusted
gross income does not exceed $50,000 and whose net worth is
less than $10,000.
Participating couples will have a high incentive to save
because their contributions will be matched at a ratio of 3:1
by the Federal Government and partnering private institutions.
As a requirement of participation, couples will receive
training that helps them repair their credit, set a budget and
savings schedule, and manage their money.
The Committee is also providing funds for pre-Marriage
Development Accounts [pMDAs], which will be available to
engaged couples, each of whom is 18 or older and whose combined
adjusted gross income is less than $50,000 and whose total net
worth is less than $10,000. These accounts will also be
available to individuals aged 16-22 who are not married, do not
have children, and whose family's adjusted gross income is less
than $25,000 (single head of household) or $50,000 (married
couple). pMDAs will give young people and couples who are about
to be married the financial tools and life skills training to
make positive choices and well-informed plans for the future.
pMDAs will help engaged couples build a strong financial and
emotional foundation to help foster successful and long-term
marriages. pMDAs will also help low-income youths gain a
longer-term perspective and provide incentives and training to
make economically and emotionally sound life decisions.
Recognizing the importance of grassroots support to ensure
the success of these efforts, the Committee is directing that
grantees use a portion of these funds to expand their network
of service providers by partnering with local churches, faith-
based organizations, and non-profit organizations. These
service providers will offer life skills training and marital
and pre-marital counseling.
Enhancing Educational and Health Opportunities for Latino Children
The Committee is concerned about the problems facing Latino
youth in the District of Columbia. Latino youth make up more
than 25 percent of the under-18 population in the District of
Columbia, compared to 10 percent nationally. Many of these
young people do not have adequate access to key services
including health insurance, health care and appropriate
education and job training. The Latino dropout rate in the
District is estimated to be in the range of 50 percent. In
addition, Latino families earned 54 percent less than the
average District resident. This is significant because income
level is a key factor in educational achievement. Educational
disparities are especially acute with English Language Learners
who constitute almost half of all Latino students nationally
and a majority of Latino students in the District.
The Committee is providing funding for a Latino Youth
Initiative to help address some of these challenges. These
resources will support the efforts of community-based
organizations in providing direct and supportive services. The
Committee has also provided funds for a D.C. Latino Education
Director. The Director will have responsibility to coordinate
with all relevant parties to ensure that Latino children have
appropriate literacy curriculum and teaching. These partners
include the District Government, DCPS, Charter Schools, Non-
Public Schools, and community-based organizations involved in
serving Latino students.
The Committee is also providing resources for a program to
help some of the District's most troubled Latino youth: high
school dropouts, former gang members, teen parents, and
adjudicated youths. Resources provided will help youths obtain
their GEDs and gain job skills in the construction industry.
These youngsters will also be helping the community by building
housing for homeless and low-income D.C. residents.
Reducing Prisoner Recidivism
The Committee understands that every year 2,500 former
prisoners return home to the District. These returning
offenders are assigned to the Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency for release plan investigations during their
parole or probation terms. Those who cannot identify a safe
place to live are assigned to halfway houses where their stays
are capped at 120 days.
The Committee believes strongly that reducing the
likelihood of homelessness for those exiting the halfway house
system is critical to combating recidivism among returning
prisoners. Therefore, the Committee has provided funds for
incentives to encourage developers and non-profit organizations
to set aside units for ex-offenders when the developer is
rehabilitating or constructing new housing.
The Committee also believes that mentors can help ex-
offenders better reintegrate into their communities by
providing them with the emotional, psychological, spiritual,
and motivational support they need. Mentors can help ex-
offenders find employment, make sure that they attend
counseling sessions, and encourage them to reconcile with
family members. Therefore, a portion of the funds provided by
the Committee is for rental reimbursements for mentors who
agree to live in the same housing development as the ex-
offenders.
Financial Condition of the District of Columbia
The Committee commends the Mayor, the City Council, and the
Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia in
improving its bond rating from the junk bond status of the mid-
1990's to investment grade status since February 2001. The
Committee notes that Wall Street bond rating agencies have
upgraded the city's rating to A. This is particularly
noteworthy, given that many other cities are now experiencing
downgrading of their bond ratings. This accomplishment is due
in large part to three factors: (1) consistent trends of
increased financial reserves, (2) stringent budget monitoring
and controls in the 3 fiscal years following elimination of the
control board, and (3) growth in taxable assessed values.
Despite the city's improved fiscal discipline, the
Committee recognizes that the District is facing a fundamental
fiscal imbalance between its revenues and its expenditures.
This imbalance is estimated to be between $470,000,000 to
$1,100,000,000 annually and, according to the Government
Accountability Office [GAO], some reasons for this imbalance
are the high cost of providing services in the city, as well as
the city's inability to tax significant amounts of real estate
which is Federal property. GAO notes that the city also faces
financial management challenges, poor training and inadequate
internal control systems that exacerbate the structural
imbalance. According to GAO, the imbalance is ``largely beyond
District officials' direct control.'' As the city uses its
limited resources to provide basic services for its residents,
it continues to defer investments in its infrastructure: roads,
bridges, school buildings, etc.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Federal Funds

A total of $593,000,000 in Federal funds are estimated to
be available to the District government, the District of
Columbia Courts, the District of Columbia Court Services and
Offender Supervision Agency, and other D.C. entities. A total
of $2,117,972,000 in Federal funds will be received by the
District government from the various Federal grant programs. In
addition, the District of Columbia receives Federal
reimbursements from such programs as Medicaid and Medicare.
The following table summarizes the various Federal funds
estimated to be available to the District government during
fiscal year 2006:

FEDERAL FUNDS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item 2006 estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support.......... 33,200
Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security 12,000
Costs................................................
Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts.... 218,912
Federal Payment for Defender Services................. 45,000
Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender 201,388
Supervision Agency...................................
Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and 5,000
Sewer Authority......................................
Federal Payment for the Anacostia Waterfront 3,000
Initiative...........................................
Federal Payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating 1,300
Council..............................................
Federal Payment for Transportation Assistance......... 1,000
Federal Payment for Foster Care and Adoption 2,000
Improvements.........................................
Federal Payment to the Chief Financial Officer........ 16,500
Federal Payment for National Guard Youth.............. 500
Federal Payment for a Forensics Lab................... 5,200
Federal Payment for School Improvement................ 40,000
Federal Payment for Marriage Development and 3,000
Improvement..........................................
Federal Payment for a Latino Youth Initiative......... 2,000
Federal Payment for Prisoner Reentrant Housing........ 3,000
-----------------
Total, Federal funds in bill.................... 593,000
Federal Grants........................................ 2,117,972
-----------------
Total, Federal Funds............................ 2,118,565
------------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RESIDENT TUITION SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $25,395,000
Budget estimate, 2006................................... 33,200,000
House allowance......................................... 33,200,000
Committee recommendation................................ 33,200,000

The Committee recommends $33,200,000 in Federal funds for
the District of Columbia Tuition Assistance Program, an
increase of $7,805,000 over the fiscal year 2005 enacted level
and the same as the President's budget request. On November 12,
1999, Public Law 106-98, the District of Columbia College
Access Act of 1999, was signed into law. The Act established
the Tuition Assistance Program, a grant program under the
direction of the Mayor of the District of Columbia, in
consultation with the Secretary of Education.
Under the Act, grants are awarded to District residents for
undergraduate education within 3 years of graduating or
obtaining a graduate equivalent degree. The applicant must be a
District resident for 12 consecutive months before the academic
year of the award. Grants pay the difference between in-State
and out-of-State tuition at public universities, with a cap of
$10,000 per student per school year, and a total cap of
$50,000. Grants may also be used for tuition at private
colleges in the metropolitan area and at any private
historically black college or university, with a cap of $2,500
per student per year, and a total cap of $12,500. In addition,
the District of Columbia College Access Improvement Act of 2001
(Public Law 107-157) expanded the Tuition Assistance Program to
individuals who enroll in an institution of higher education
more than 3 years after graduating from a secondary school and
to individuals who attend private, historically black colleges
and universities nationwide.
Every year since the inception of the tuition assistance
grant program, the Federal Government has provided sufficient
funds to allow all eligible participants to attend out-of-State
colleges and universities at the in-State tuition rate. The
Committee is pleased to note that 55 percent of all
participants are the first members of their families to attend
college and that 75 percent of students surveyed at one of the
largest schools in the city said that the program influenced
their decision to pursue post-secondary education. Clearly, the
program is working well and more and more District students are
gaining the opportunity to attend colleges and universities of
their choice.
The Committee recognizes that this program has enabled many
District of Columbia residents to pursue post-secondary
educational opportunities. The program is unique to the
District in providing a similar opportunity to the state-level
university system in all states. The Committee notes this
year's budget request of $33,200,000 represents over a 30
percent increase over fiscal year 2005 funding, which itself
represented a 50 percent boost over the fiscal year 2004 level.
The Committee understands that the District has used reserve
funds to fund the program in fiscal year 2005 and appears to
have reduced the extensive carryover fund balance that raised
concerns in previous budgets.
The Committee is concerned that the significant annual
funding increases in a brief 2-year span signal that program
costs have the potential of growing well beyond the level at
which future Federal funding may be available and sustainable.
To address this concern, the Committee directs the Mayor and
the District's State Education Office officials to work closely
with its Senate and House authorizing and appropriations
Committees to immediately take steps to institute effective
cost containment measures and regularly report to Congress
about the effects of these efforts. The Committee further
directs the District to fully explore non-Federal sources of
additional funds to augment the Federal investment to meet
program needs.

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $189,274,000
Budget estimate, 2006................................... 221,693,000
House allowance......................................... 221,693,000
Committee recommendation................................ 218,912,000

The Committee recommends $218,912,000 for the D.C. Courts.
This is $29,638,000 more than the fiscal year 2005 enacted
level and $2,781,000 below the President's budget request. As
part of the District of Columbia Revitalization Act of 1997,
the Federal Government began to finance the D.C. Courts. This
includes funding for the operations of the D.C. Court of
Appeals, Superior Court, and the Court System. By law, the
annual budget includes estimates of the expenditures for the
operations of the Courts prepared by the Joint Committee on
Judicial Administration and the President's recommendation for
funding the Courts' operations.

Court Operations

The Committee recommends $138,183,000 for the Courts'
operations, an increase of $3,584,000 over the fiscal year 2005
enacted level and the same as the President's request.

Court Capital Expenditures

The Committee recommends $80,729,000 for capital
improvements, a total of $2,781,000 below the President's
budget request and $24,528,000 above the fiscal year 2005
level.
The increased funds for capital expenditures will allow the
Courts to continue to renovate, improve, and expand court
facilities. The Committee recognizes that the relocation of the
Court of Appeals from its existing location in the Moultrie
Courthouse to the Old Courthouse at 451 Indiana Avenue is a
critical step towards meeting the space needs of the D.C. Court
of Appeals and providing critical additional space for Superior
Court operations, including the newly formed Family Court in
the Moultrie Building. The Committee understands that the
readaptation of the Old Courthouse for modern day use as a
functional courthouse includes the restoration of this national
historic landmark, expansion of the courthouse, and
construction of an underground parking garage west of the
historic building.
This increase will also enable the Courts to continue
implementation of the Integrated Justice Information System
[IJIS] and allow the Courts to upgrade fire and security alarm
systems.

Transfer Authority

The Committee authorizes the Courts to transfer up to
$1,000,000 of the operations funds provided in the Federal
Payment to the D.C. Courts among the accounts within the
Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts
appropriation. This flexibility will be especially important in
implementing Family Court reforms. The Committee authorizes the
Courts to transfer up to 4 percent of the capital funds
provided. This flexibility will enable the Courts to prioritize
renovations and construction projects.

Reporting Requirements

The Courts are directed to submit monthly reports, through
the General Services Administration, to the Senate and House
Committees on Appropriations, within 15 calendar days after the
end of each month, on the status of obligations by object class
and a monthly personnel summary by position, full-time
equivalent positions, and program/function. The obligation
report should show, at a minimum, the original operating plan,
current operating plan, obligations year to date, percent
obligated, planned obligations year to date, percentage
deviation from plan year to date, projected total obligations
end of year, and projected surplus/deficit.
In addition, the obligation report shall: (1) under the
Defender Services Spending Plan, include a breakdown of
expenditures for the Counsel for Child Abuse and Neglect
Program and the program of representation of indigents in
criminal cases under the Criminal Justice Act; (2) include a
monthly breakdown of expenditures for the D.C. Courts' capital
improvements; and (3) where year-to-date obligations exceed or
fall below the plan estimates by 1 percent or more, include an
explanation of why a category is over- or under-budgeted.
Financial Plan.--The Executive Officer of the District of
Columbia Courts shall provide a financial plan of the fiscal
year 2006 enacted level for operations and capital improvements
of the D.C. Courts to the Committees on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives and Senate no later than March 31,
2006. The financial plan shall detail by object class the
planned expenditure of the Courts' appropriation, describing
any new initiatives or deviation from the conference report.
The Committee shall provide a joint House-Senate letter of
approval to the Courts after review of the financial plan. The
Courts must provide 30 days notice to the Committee in order to
deviate from the financial plan after approval of such plan by
Congress.

DEFENDER SERVICES IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $38,192,000
Budget estimate, 2006................................... 45,000,000
House allowance......................................... 45,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 45,000,000

The Committee recommends $45,000,000 for attorney programs
for indigent defendants, child abuse and guardianship cases
administered by the D.C. Courts, the same as the President's
request and $6,808,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted
level. This funding increase will allow D.C. attorneys and
investigators to receive the same hourly rate as their Federal
counterparts.

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER SUPERVISION AGENCY
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $178,560,000
Budget estimate, 2006................................... 203,388,000
House allowance......................................... 203,388,000
Committee recommendation................................ 201,388,000

The Committee recommends $201,388,000 for the Court
Services and Offender Supervision Agency [CSOSA]. This
recommendation is $2,000,000 below the President's budget
request and $22,828,000 more than the fiscal year 2005 enacted
level.
The District of Columbia Revitalization Act of 1997
established CSOSA, assuming the functions of the District's
pretrial services, adult probation, parole, and adult offender
supervision functions. The mission of CSOSA for the District of
Columbia is to increase public safety, prevent crime, reduce
recidivism, and support the fair administration of justice in
close collaboration with the community.
The Revitalization Act relieved the District of Columbia of
``state-level'' financial responsibilities and restructured a
number of criminal justice functions, including pretrial
services, parole, and adult probation. Following passage of the
Revitalization Act, under the direction of a Trustee appointed
by the U.S. Attorney General, three separate and disparately
functioning entities of the District of Columbia government
were reorganized into one Federal agency. CSOSA assumed its
probation function from the D.C. Superior Court and its parole
function from the D.C. Board of Parole. The Revitalization Act
transferred the parole supervision functions to CSOSA and the
parole decision-making functions to the U.S. Parole Commission
[USPC]. On August 5, 1998, the parole determination function
was transferred to the USPC, and on August 4, 2000, the USPC
assumed responsibility for parole revocation and modification
with respect to felons. The CSOSA appropriation is comprised of
three components: The Community Supervision Program [CSP], the
District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency [PSA], and the
Public Defender Service [PDS] for the District of Columbia. PDS
is a federally funded independent D.C. agency responsible for
the defense of indigent individuals and receives funding by
transfer from the CSOSA appropriation. The CSP is responsible
for supervision of offenders (either on probation or parole),
and the PSA is responsible for supervising pretrial defendants.
The Committee understands that the majority of the
additional funds it is providing will be used to increase the
capacity of residential substance abuse treatment for offenders
at Karrick Hall from 21 to 100 participants. These resources
will fund the level of treatment slots at the fully authorized
level. The Committee recognizes that most offenders have
serious drug addiction problems and must receive treatment in
order to lead productive, crime-free lives. The Committee is
pleased that CSOSA has made such steady progress in increasing
the drug treatment capacity for offenders.
The funding provided will also enable CSOSA to enhance its
community-based and sanctions-based supervision strategy and
support the fair administration of justice by providing the
courts and the U.S. Parole Commission with timely, accurate and
complete information required in their decision-making process.
The Committee recommendation also includes $42,195,000 for the
D.C. Pretrial Services Agency and a transfer of $29,833,000 for
the D.C. Public Defender Service.

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR SECURITY COSTS RELATED
TO THE PRESENCE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $14,880,000
Budget estimate, 2006................................... 15,000,000
House allowance......................................... 15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,000,000

The Committee is aware that the District police, fire, and
emergency personnel have had to provide security for a number
of events due to the fact that the District of Columbia is the
seat of the Federal Government and headquarters of many
international organizations. Recently, the need for the
District of Columbia to provide security has increased, thereby
increasing over-time costs for personnel and diverting police
from neighborhood patrols. The President has supported
reimbursing the District for these costs. The Committee
recommends $12,000,000 for this purpose which is $3,000,000
below the President's request and the fiscal year 2005 level.
The Committee understands that since the beginning of this
year, the District has been expending its fiscal year 2005
security resources at a rate of approximately $1,000,000 per
month. Therefore, the Committee is providing the level of
funding which assumes that the District will continue to spend
at the current expenditure rate.

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $32,240,000
Budget estimate, 2006...................................................
House allowance......................................... 20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 16,500,000

The Committee is providing $16,500,000 to the Chief
Financial Officer of the District of Columbia for education,
job-training, security, economic development, and health
projects in the District of Columbia. The Committee intends to
continue to provide a portion of these funds to Children's
National Medical Center for a new pediatric intensive care unit
and neonatal intensive care unit and to St. Coletta's of
Greater Washington for its building project.

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR THE ANACOSTIA WATERFRONT INITIATIVE IN THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $2,976,000
Budget estimate, 2006................................... 5,000,000
House allowance......................................... 5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,000,000

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 to continue to
implement the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, which is $24,000
below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and $2,000,000 below
the President's budget request. These funds will support the
construction of a multi-use hiker and biker trail system along
both sides of the Anacostia River in the District of Columbia.
This recreational amenity and transportation alternative will
help connect neighborhoods and transform the Anacostia River
into a great civic center for the city. The Committee
understands that the 20-mile interconnected trail network will
provide pedestrian and bicycle-friendly access to the shores of
the Anacostia River and will serve to connect the regional
trail system in Maryland to the National Mall. With alternative
corridors and loops to choose from, users of the trail will
find a variety of experiences and connections to other regional
and national trails, including Fort Circle Trail, Bladensburg
Trail, the East Coast Greenway and the Potomac Heritage Scenic
Trail.
The Committee continues to support the use of innovative
bridges along the Anacostia bike trail and urges the District's
Department of Transportation to consider using this new
technology in other road projects throughout the city.

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $4,762,000
Budget estimate, 2006...................................................
House allowance......................................... 10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,000,000

The Committee recommends $5,000,000, to be matched 100
percent with local funds, for the Water and Sewer Authority
[WASA] to implement the Combined Sewer Overflow Program. This
is $238,000 more than the amount appropriated in fiscal year
2005. The President requested no funds for this purpose. The
Committee notes that this funding will assist WASA in designing
a new system to address combined sewer overflows. The combined
sewer system, which serves 33 percent of the District, was
constructed in 1890 by the Federal Government. Because of its
age and capacity contraints, the system discharges sanitary
waste and storm-water into the surrounding rivers approximately
60-75 times per year during heavy rains.

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR TRANSPORTATION

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $2,480,000
Budget estimate, 2006...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000

The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for transportation
assistance in the District of Columbia, which is $1,480,000
below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The President did not
request funds for this purpose.
The Committee intends that these resources be for expenses
related to phase I implementation of the District's downtown
circulator transit system. This new surface transportation
service will provide high-frequency, high-quality, and low-cost
service to connect the east and west sides of downtown, the
White House, the National Mall and monuments area, the Capitol
Complex, Union Station, and Georgetown. The Committee
understands that these funds will be matched 100 percent by the
District of Columbia and by the private sector (led by the
Downtown Business Improvement District group). The Committee
understands that Phase I of the Circulator is now operating and
will include the following routes: (1) north-south along 7th
Street, NW, between the Convention Center and the SW
Waterfront; and (2) east-west between Georgetown and Union
Station.

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR FOSTER CARE IMPROVEMENT

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $4,960,000
Budget estimate, 2006...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 2,000,000

The Committee understands that in the District of Columbia,
the Child and Family Services Agency [CFSA] is responsible for
protecting approximately 3,000 children in ``out-of-home''
placements, and another 5,000 children in ``in-home''
placements. During its history, many children in CFSA's care
have languished for extended periods of time due to managerial
shortcomings and long-standing organizational divisiveness in
the city. As a result, the agency was placed in receivership in
1995. In June 2001, the court removed CFSA from receivership
and put the agency under probation. That probationary period
ended in January 2003.
Concerned about CFSA's troubled history, the Committee
began a Federal foster care initiative in fiscal year 2004
which focused on improving several critical areas. These
critical needs are: (1) intensive, early intervention when
children enter care; (2) early mental health assessments and
mental health services for all children in foster care; (3)
recruitment and retention of qualified social workers; (4)
recruitment and retention of foster parents; and (5) improved
computer tracking of all children in foster care. During fiscal
year 2004 and 2005, the Committee provided a total of
$20,000,000 to fund these efforts. The Committee was extremely
disappointed that the District's City Council voted to reduce
local funding for CFSA in its fiscal year 2006 local budget.
The Council took this action despite the objections of the
Mayor, the Director of CFSA, the Court-appointed Federal judge
who had served as the agency's receiver, and child welfare
advocates in the District. The Committee believes strongly that
these actions will undermine the significant strides that CFSA
had made with Federal support. Further, the Committee is
concerned about the precedent that the Council has taken by
using Federal funds to supplant local funds, despite the clear
language in the Act and believes that the Council's actions
have violated the spirit of the law.
Despite grave concerns that the Council will take a similar
action next year, the Committee wants CFSA to continue to make
improvements. Therefore, the Committee is providing funds to
continue to provide loan repayment for social workers, to
assist with post-adoption services and to continue to provide
respite opportunities for foster parents.

Loan Repayment for Social Workers

The Committee is providing $1,000,000 for the repayment of
student loans for social workers at CFSA. The Committee
understands that the higher the caseload per social worker, the
lower the quality of service to each of the caseworker's
children. The District, like many cities, suffers from a high
turnover rate of social workers. In fact, the national turnover
rate has doubled since 1991. Clearly, the relatively low pay
and difficult working conditions of social workers has resulted
in a child welfare workforce crisis.
The Committee recognizes that steps must be taken to
encourage more workers to enter the child welfare workforce and
improve the salaries, working conditions, and training of
workers. Student loan repayment is aiding in the retention and
improvement of conditions for the District's social workers.

Post Adoptive Services

The Committee is providing $750,000 to assist CFSA in
providing post permanency services to adoptive parents and
guardians to ensure that children remain in stable homes. These
resources will fund mental health services, respite support,
training seminars, one-on-one counseling support, and a post-
permanency resource center.

Recruitment and Retention of Foster Parents

The Committee is providing $250,000 to recruit and retain
foster parents. The Committee recognizes that CFSA has
experienced difficulties recruiting and retaining an adequate
number of appropriate, qualified foster parents. This lack of
sufficient numbers of foster homes has given rise to so-called
group homes in the District.
One reason for the shortage of foster parents is the lack
of availability of respite care in the District. The Committee
has been informed that foster parents do not have the same
opportunities for respite as biological parents. Foster parents
cannot merely send their children to spend the weekend with a
relative or family friend, or to visit with a classmate at his
or her home. Foster parents must seek out persons who have met
many agency-established criteria. Therefore, foster parents
often care for their children--many of whom have special
needs--without significant breaks.
Of the funds provided, the Committee intends that the
Washington Council of Governments, which has years of
experience with the D.C. foster care system, provide the direct
service implementation of this respite proposal and that the
Foster and Adoptive Parents Advocacy Center provide the
oversight, quality control, and evaluation of the program. The
Committee intends that resources shall provide: (1) emergency
respite, which would be provided with less than 1 month's
notice; (2) planned respite, which would be planned at least 1
month in advance; and (3) ongoing respite, which would be at
pre-established meeting times and places, e.g., Saturday
programs, enrichment programs, and field trips.

Concerns About the District's Juvenile Justice System

In fiscal year 2005, the Committee received a report and
heard testimony from the District of Columbia's Inspector
General which detailed the deplorable conditions and wasteful
management at the Oak Hill Youth Facility, the city's juvenile
detention facility. Afterwards, Committee members visited the
campus to see the situation first-hand. The Committee found
that not only are the buildings aged and decrepit, but as the
Inspector General's report stated, important services such as
substance abuse treatment programs are unavailable for drug-
addicted youths. Children who are detained and awaiting trial
are commingled with those who are committed offenders.
The Committee has stated that it agrees with the November
6, 2001 recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on Youth
Safety and Juvenile Justice Reform that Oak Hill be ``closed
and demolished.'' It is an old, decrepit, institution that is
inadequate for youth detention and undoubtedly very expensive
to operate and maintain. The Committee is concerned at the
continued slow pace of progress and urges District officials to
follow the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission and
shut down Oak Hill as quickly as feasible.
The Committee is also concerned with the poor delivery of
services to youth in the District's court services and juvenile
justice services agencies. The Committee strongly urges the
District of Columbia government and all relevant agencies who
participate in the welfare and oversight of troubled youth in
the juvenile justice, education, mental health, and social
services systems in the District to work together more closely
and to diligently carry out the their responsibilities to
better pursue and produce acceptable outcomes that demonstrate
success in resolving all the district's juvenile justice
problems.

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $39,680,000
Budget estimate, 2006................................... 41,616,000
House allowance......................................... 41,616,000
Committee recommendation................................ 40,000,000

The Committee has included $40,000,000 to augment and
improve educational opportunities for all students in the
District of Columbia. This is $320,000 above the fiscal year
2005 enacted level and $1,616,000 below the President's budget
request. This initiative is comprised of three interrelated
components: investing in excellence in traditional public
schools; expanding choice through high quality charter schools;
and offering opportunity scholarships for low-income students
in under-performing schools. Therefore, of the funds provided,
$13,000,000 is to provide a scholarship program for low-income
children in under-performing schools; $13,000,000 is for the
development of quality public charter schools; $13,000,000 is
to strengthen leadership and instructional excellence and
increase student achievement at District of Columbia Public
Schools in accordance with the No Child Left Behind Act; and
$1,000,000 is for administrative expenses.

Improving Public Education

The Committee recommends $13,000,000 for the District of
Columbia Public Schools [DCPS]. Of these funds, the Committee
directs that not less than $250,000 shall be to support the
Superintendent's assessment of public school facilities. As it
has since it first began providing funds for school improvement
in fiscal year 2004, the Committee continues to direct DCPS to
use some of this appropriation to recruit and retain principals
and teachers to strengthen leadership and instructional
excellence. Further, DCPS is directed to use a portion of these
funds to improve student achievement by providing supplemental
services and enhancing public school choice. Within 30 days of
enactment, DCPS must provide an expenditure plan for the use of
this appropriation.
The Committee believes that some improvements were made
with fiscal year 2004 and 2005 funding by rewarding excellence
in D.C. public schools.

Hearings on Education

The Committee held two hearings on public education in the
District of Columbia which informed the fiscal year 2006
recommendations. The first hearing, held on May 25, 2005
focused on the public school and public charter school systems
in the District, highlighting many areas which need
improvement. The second hearing, held on June 15, 2005 reviewed
the fiscal year 2006 local funds budget to support education.
During both of these hearings, the Committee learned the
following troubling information.

Poor Performance

Only 32 percent of 4th graders in DCPS are reading at a
basic level, compared to 62 percent nationally. Only 36 percent
of these same students are performing at a basic level in math,
compared to 77 percent nationally. This means that two out of
every three 4th graders in the District cannot read, multiply,
or divide at the appropriate grade level. Special education
students make up 20 percent of the school system's enrollment
of 61,710 students--twice the national average for school
districts. DCPS students scored approximately 200 points below
the national average on the SAT.

High Costs

Per-pupil spending in the District of Columbia is the
highest in the Nation. According to the National Education
Association, the District spends $13,317 per pupil each year,
which is much higher than the national average of $8,208.
During its hearings, the Committee learned that
insufficient funding is not the problem. To the contrary,
according to the District's Chief Financial Officer, funding
for the District's school system--including traditional public
schools and charter schools--has increased 75 percent since
fiscal year 1999, even though overall enrollment has actually
dropped 5 percent during that same time period. Student
enrollment in traditional public schools has dropped 19 percent
since fiscal year 1999, as parents have sought out other
options for their children. Yet funding for traditional public
schools (not including charter schools) has increased 38
percent over that same time period. It appears that the funding
for DCPS is entirely decoupled from student enrollment.
Despite large increases in spending, one-third of schools
have no art or music education programs. Many school facilities
remain open, even though they are well below capacity, are run-
down or even unsafe. These past failures are significant and
have contributed to the 37 percent adult illiteracy rate in the
District. The DCPS superintendent testified that over 30
percent of DCPS teachers are not even certified.
The Committee has lerned that DCPS spends only 50 cents of
every operating dollar to directly educate its students. This
is far below the national average of 61 percent and is lower
than any of the 50 States.

Plan for Improvement

The Committee understands that the District hired a new
superintendent in August 2004 who has an ambitious plan to (1)
improve teaching and learning in every classroom; (2) provide
more efficient management and operations systems; and (3)
increase collaborations with parents, civic organizations,
businesses, and other city agencies.
To accomplish the first goal, he plans to institute more
challenging curriculum and standards, give high-performing
schools greater autonomy, offer art and music education again,
put new discipline policies in place, expand professional
development for teachers, and partner with the business and
civic community to gain their support for students.
To accomplish the second goal, he plans to improve
procurement processes, upgrade administrative systems,
institute performance-based budgeting, complete a new
information technology plan, and make the best use of all
school facilities.
To accomplish the third goal, he plans to provide more
community briefings, open a new office devoted to parent
involvement with 5 parent resource centers, and establish a
business advisory committee to guide communications and
outreach efforts city-wide.
The Committee supports all of these planned efforts.

Reason for Concern

Although the Committee is supportive of the new DCPS
superintendent and his plan for over hauling the D.C. school
system, the Committee is aware that five DCPS superintendents
have come and gone over the past 7 years. Often the varied
attempts by these individuals to fix the problems were met with
delay, denial, and dismissal.
The Committee is informed that a number of schools with
declining enrollments and in deteriorating condition should be
closed and disposed of for some better purpose. The Committee
believes that the savings achieved by closing under-utilized
school buildings can be used to repair and improve the
remaining school buildings.
In addition, the Committee understands that 4,633 students
submitted applications to attend a public school outside of
their neighborhood. There are 3,276 students on waiting lists
at various schools in the District, with some schools' waiting
lists as long as 250. The Committee would strongly support DCPS
allocating funds to replicate successful pubic school models in
neighborhoods identified in need of additional public school
options.
The Committee understands that DCPS' information technology
[IT] systems are plagued with problems. In his own strategic
plan, the superintendent states that DCPS' IT systems are 10-15
years behind industry norms and that DCPS suffers from a ``huge
technology gap.'' These severe IT problems undermine DCPS'
ability to carry out its underlying mission. The Committee
believes that the nature and complexity of these IT problems
warrant a comprehensive, long-term solution. As the
superintendent works to address this problem, the Committee
recommends that he seek assistance from the State Information
Technology Consortium [SITC], a non-profit organization with
substantial experience in the development of IT collaborative
solutions. SITC is well-suited to help DCPS develop practical,
cost-effective solutions using existing technology investments.
The Committee is supportive of the vision of the new
superintendent and believes that he is personally and
professionally skilled to make major improvements to the
current system.
However, the Committee plans to monitor the progress of
DCPS' improvement--both in student achievement and in resource
and facilities management. The Committee intends to intervene
in the coming year if improvements in these areas are not
achieved.

Strengthening Charter Schools

The Committee recommends $13,000,000 for public charter
schools in the District of Columbia, directed to specific
initiatives which will strengthen schools, enhance capacity,
improve academic quality, and create a network of integrated
services. The Committee recommends the following initiatives
within the amount provided for charter schools: $4,000,000 for
the Direct Loan Fund for Charter Schools; $2,000,000 for Credit
Enhancement; $2,000,000 for continuation of the City Build
Charter School Program; $1,500,000 for flexible grants;
$2,000,000 only for grants for public charter schools for
improvement of public school facilities which are leased or
owned by public charter schools; $400,000 for college access
programming; $300,000 to create a truancy center; $250,000 for
administration of Federal entitlement funding; $300,000 for
data collection and analysis; and $250,000 for administration
within the State Education Office. In addition, the Mayor of
the District of Columbia is directed to continue the Public
Education Improvement Incentive Grant program created in fiscal
year 2005 with unobligated funds. Grant awards are a
significant incentive to raising student achievement and
supporting principals in their everyday work.
The Committee has played a significant role in the
development of public charter schools in the District of
Columbia. With 42 public charter schools now educating 21
percent of the student population, the District of Columbia has
the distinction of having more charter schools per capita than
any other city or State in the Nation. In fiscal year 2005 the
Committee included language engaging the Government
Accountability Office [GAO] to study the performance of the
D.C. charter school authorizing boards (or ``authorizers'') in
their approval and oversight roles. The authorizers in the
District are the D.C. Board of Education and the D.C. Public
Charter School Board. Specifically, the GAO was required to
report on the performance of the authorizers in their role in
monitoring the quality of instruction provided to the students
attending charter schools. In the report, ``Charter Schools--
Oversight Practices in the District of Columbia'', issued in
May 2005, the GAO found that under current law charter school
authorizers are prohibited from revoking a charter for failure
to accomplish the schools' academic goals before 5 years from
issuance of the charter. The Committee is concerned that this
unduly restricts the authorizers from taking necessary steps to
ensure that the schools they charter are providing a quality
education to their students.
In the District of Columbia 19 schools are required under
the No Child Left Behind Act to be making annual yearly
progress [AYP] toward their academic goals, of which only 9
achieved AYP. The Committee strongly believes that the charter
school authorizers should have all the tools they need to
provide oversight and support to the schools they charter.
Therefore, the Committee strongly urges the Mayor and Council
to review the requirements of both the D.C. School Reform Act
and the No Child Left Behind Act and make any legislative
changes necessary to ensure consistency between the two acts
regarding the promotion of school quality. At a minimum, the
law governing charter school authorization and oversight in the
District should not constrain or prohibit authorizers from
taking appropriate action to ensure that the public charter
schools under their purview are reaching the academic
achievement expectations required by the school charter or
NCLB.
Facilities.--Access to appropriate facilities is a major
challenge of public charter schools. The Committee is
encouraged that public charter schools will receive equal
access to public facilities and financing. The following are
specific areas of concern for the Committee.
Co-location.--The Committee commends the Superintendent of
the District of Columbia Public Schools and the Board of
Education for assessing excess space in public school
facilities and making some space available to pubic charter
schools in need of appropriate school facilities immediately.
The Committee understands that 10 public schools with
underutilized classrooms will share space with a public charter
school in the fall of 2005, so called ``co-locations''. The
District requires that rental payments from a charter school be
for the use of the host school, which provides a strong
incentive to lease underutilized space (D.C. Code Sec. 38-
1831.01(b)(2)) because rental payments from charter schools
provide a reliable revenue source for host schools. The
Committee strongly supports the Superintendent as co-location
leases are implemented for school year 2005-2006.
Surplus Public School Facilities.--In March 2000 the
District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management
Assistance Authority transferred jurisdiction of 38 public
school properties to the control of the Mayor of the District
of Columbia. These so-called ``surplus school properties'' have
been utilized for the following purposes: 6 have been sold to
charter schools; 10 have been leased to charter schools; 5 are
being used by D.C. Public Schools for office space; 3 are being
used for shelter from homelessness; 4 are being used for
government office space; 5 are vacant; 7 have been sold for
economic development; and 2 are being leased to private
entities.
The School Reform Act of 1995 provided a preference for
charter schools to obtain surplus property to alleviate
identified lack of appropriate school space. The Committee
strongly supported the legal preference in its fiscal year 2003
and 2004 Committee reports. In addition, Public Law 108-335,
Section 342(c) requires that charter schools are provided a
right of first offer on the disposition of any property.
The Committee requests a report from the Mayor of the
District of Columbia, in consultation with the Chairman of the
Council of the District of Columbia, on the current use of all
38 original surplus properties, the market rate value of each
property, and the profit generated from any prior sales to more
fully understand the benefit to the city.
The Committee strongly encourages the city to create a
mechanism whereby the proceeds from sales or leases of surplus
public school property are deposited into a segregated account
for school facilities improvement. The proceeds would enable
the Superintendent to improve the entire system at a time when
facilities funding is limited.
This year public charter schools spent $11,000,000 on the
private real estate market to renovate facilities for
educational use, and it is projected that charter schools will
spend an additional $16,000,000 next year. The Committee
remains concerned about the lack of appropriate educational
space for public charter schools while former public school
facilities are used for other purposes. The Committee expects
that additional surplus public school facilities will be made
available expeditiously to charter schools, consistent with the
right of first offer required under Section 342(c) of Public
Law 108-335.
Incubator Facility.--The Committee strongly supports the
creation of regional incubator facilities for public charter
schools to house a small number of new schools in each facility
for a limited time. The Committee directs that no later than
February 1, 2006 the Mayor of the District of Columbia shall
obligate prior year funding for such a facility or facilities,
in partnership with the Building Hope Charter School Facilities
Fund.
City Build Charter School Program.--The Committee
recommendation includes $2,000,000 to continue the City Build
Charter School Program. The program shall first identify
communities which have the greatest near term potential of
attracting or retaining residents as ``City Build
Communities''; then the Mayor may solicit proposals from public
charter schools to locate in City Build Communities. The
Committee strongly encourages that public charter schools which
demonstrate community service activities, such as family
literacy programs, receive priority in future grants. In
addition, the Committee continues to strongly encourage the
Mayor of the District of Columbia and the Deputy Mayor for
Planning and Economic Development to give priority and to
highly leverage public funds to projects which include charter
schools or other educational space in future development in the
District.
The Mayor of the District of Columbia is directed to use up
to $500,000 of prior year unobligated funds to conduct an
independent study of how public school options may attract or
retain families to live in the District of Columbia. Of these
funds, the State Education Office may use such sums as
necessary for administration of the study and creation of a
database of where families live and attend school.
To achieve the goal of attracting or retaining residents,
the independent study shall assess the opportunity for schools
to enhance neighborhoods; the capacity and desire of residents
for authorizing specific neighborhood-based public charter
schools; and recommendations on new policies necessary to
encourage connections among schools and community. In addition,
the study shall identify communities in the District which have
recently experienced shifts in population, specifically of
families with school-age children; communities where high
quality public school options are at capacity; and communities
that have recently undergone or will undergo in the near future
residential development. This study shall inform the Mayor's
selection of ``City Build Communities.''

Improving Opportunities for School Choice

The Committee recommendation includes $14,000,000 to
continue a scholarship program to allow low-income students
attending consistently under-performing public schools to
choose to attend private schools within the District. The
Committee believes that this program is improving the academic
prospects of students receiving scholarships and is stimulating
improvement within the public school system.
The Committee is providing funds for scholarships that will
be available to low-income District students in grades K
through 12 who are attending consistently low performing public
schools. The scholarships are for the tuition, transportation,
and fees at participating private schools within the District
and cannot exceed $7,500 per elementary and middle school
student. If the funds provided are not sufficient to serve all
the eligible applicants, scholarships will be awarded through
random selection.
Program Is Succeeding
The Committee is very pleased with the first year launch of
the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. In a very brief
period, the Washington Scholarship Fund [WSF], the grantee
administering the program, has accepted applications from more
than 5,400 students. The Committee understands the challenges
that WSF has met, given the speed with which the organization
had to design, launch, and recruit for the historic new
demonstration project in school choice. Even so, WSF has made
substantial progress in the inaugural months of the program, as
noted by the U.S. Department of Education in its first report
to Congress on the program.
In the ``Evaluation of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship
Program: First Year Report on Participation,'' the Institute
for Education Sciences at the U.S. Department of Education
noted that:
--More than 1,800 eligible, low-income D.C. children applied
for the program for the 2004-2005 school year during an
extremely brief application period necessitated by the
lateness of the law's passage.
--The average household income of the 2004-2005 applicants
was $18,742, far below the statutory requirement of 185
percent of the poverty level.
--Compared to other scholarship programs across the Nation,
this program has a more diverse group of participating
schools, including 28 percent of schools that are not
religiously affiliated.
--Based on applicant levels to date for 2005-2006, there will
be enough students for both the ``treatment'' and
``control'' groups in all 13 grades (K-12) to provide a
sufficient sample for the rigorous, federally mandated
evaluation of the program.
In addition to these conclusions from the Department of
Education's April report, the Committee notes that last fall,
1,029 students entered D.C. non-public schools using
Opportunity Scholarships. The first year of the program offered
scholarship recipients a choice of 58 participating schools.
Over 95 percent of students who started the school year stayed
in the program.
The Committee is pleased that more than 1,000 students have
received scholarships for the upcoming school year, 2005-2006,
and that there are nearly 900 students in the control group for
the Federal evaluation, including students in all 13 grades, K-
12.
Private High School Capacity is Inadequate
Against the backdrop of this very promising start, the
Committee is concerned that there is a shortage of spaces in
D.C. non-public high schools for students with scholarships.
The Committee understands that presently there is a mismatch
between the number of high school spaces available and the
number of scholarship students seeking a space in a D.C. non-
public high school. As a result, students already in possession
of a scholarship will have to leave the program due to the
capacity constraint. This is a problem for the families and the
students who will not have access to the choice they were
awarded by virtue of receiving the scholarship. It will also
have a deleterious effect on the Federal evaluation since some
students in the ``treatment'' group will not in fact be able to
use their scholarships and will not receive their desired
``treatment.''
Capacity Problem Will Worsen Every Year
This is a problem that has already surfaced for the
upcoming school year, but it will only get worse in the 3
subsequent years of the demonstration project. Specifically,
for the 2005-2006 school year there are between 40 and 60 high
school students still looking for a school. Even without
distributing any new scholarships in grades 6 through 12, the
number of high school students who cannot find a space is
expected to grow each year as current middle school students
graduate: 152 8th graders entering high school in year 3, 175
7th graders entering high school in year 4, and 179 6th graders
entering high school in year 5. At this rate by the final year
of the demonstration project, there will be 606 students in
high school, even with no new scholarships being distributed
past the fifth grade. If no action is taken, nearly 75 percent
of students holding scholarships to attend high school will be
unable to use them because of limited capacity.
Reasons for Capacity Problems
The Committee has been informed that there are apparently
two primary reasons that capacity is limited in the high school
grades: (1) the scholarship cap of $7,500 is below the cost of
tuition and fees in the vast majority of D.C. non-public high
schools, creating a financial hardship for schools who enroll
scholarship students; (2) the requirement that students attend
only schools within the District of Columbia severely limits
the slots available at the high school level.
The Committee plans to hold hearings to learn from expert
witnesses about the full extent of the capacity limitations for
the upcoming year and the subsequent academic years. It also
intends to explore options for addressing these challenges, and
to understand the implications of students not using their
scholarships on the federally-mandated evaluation.
The Committee deeply regrets that, because of a shortage of
available spaces in D.C. non-public high schools, a number of
students who are already enrolled in the scholarship program
for 8th grade will be forced to return to failing public
schools--negating the very choice of an alternative which the
program was designed to create. The Committee also regrets that
a number of students who applied for and successfully received
scholarships through the lottery will not be able to use their
scholarships after all.

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR FORENSICS AND BIOTERRORISM LABORATORY

Appropriations, 2005.................................... $7,936,000
Budget estimate, 2006................................... 7,200,000
House allowance......................................... 7,200,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,200,000

The Committee recommends $5,200,000 for costs associated
with the construction of a new bioterrorism and forensics
laboratory in the District of Columbia. This is $2,000,000 less
than the President's budget and $2,736,000 below the fiscal
year 2005 enacted level. The District's laboratory capacity has
not kept pace with the innovations in the field and is
therefore unable to meet the demands of the current workload.
Because of this lack of capacity, the District is forced to
seek help from the FBI crime laboratory in Quantico, Virginia.
The FBI has its own workload capacity and therefore limits the
evidence it will process for the District. This lack of
capacity and the limitations of old technology have led to many
so-called ``cold'' or unsolved crime cases in the District. A
new laboratory will not only allow the District to more
effectively and efficiently process crime cases, but it will be
an essential element in processing evidence associated with
potential bioterrorism attacks. The Committee expects the
District to provide at least an additional $1,500,000 in local
funds for the costs associated with this new laboratory.

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR MARRIAGE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT

Appropriations, 2005....................................................
Budget estimate, 2006...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................ $3,000,000

Children Born to Married Parents Usually Have Brighter Futures

The Committee is informed that every year almost 57 percent
of babies born to residents of the District of Columbia are
born to single mothers. This is more than 40 percent higher
than the national average. The Committee understands that
children raised by never-married mothers are 7 times more
likely to be poor compared to those children born to married
parents and that over 80 percent of long-term child poverty
occurs in broken or never-married families.
The Committee believes that marriage has an enormous
potential to reduce poverty among couples who are unmarried at
the time of their child's birth. Studies show that increasing
the number of healthy marriages would also have substantial
non-economic benefits for children. For example, children who
are raised in marriage by their biological mother and father
are less likely to have emotional and behavioral problems, to
be physically abused, to become involved in crime, to fail in
school, to abuse drugs, and to end up on welfare as adults.

Promoting Teen Abstinence has Positive Results

The Committee is aware of the negative effects of sexual
behavior among teenagers. Studies show that girls who begin
sexual activity at an early age are more likely to become
pregnant and give birth out of wedlock and to be single
mothers. Since single mothers are far more likely to be poor,
early sexual activity is linked to higher levels of child and
maternal poverty. The Committee believes that abstinence
education programs aid in encouraging teenagers to delay sexual
activity and the negative consequences associated with it.

Marriage Development Accounts

The Committee understands that most children born and
raised in households where their biological parents are married
are more financially and emotionally stable. As a way to assist
low-income married couples to save money to pay for job
training or education, buy a home or start their own
businesses, the Committee is providing funds to establish
``Marriage Development Accounts'' [MDAs] in the District of
Columbia. MDAs will be available to married couples who are
citizens or legal residents of the District of Columbia whose
Federal adjusted gross income does not exceed $50,000 and whose
net worth is less than $10,000 (excluding a primary residence
and one vehicle).
Participating couples will have a high incentive to save
because their contributions will be matched at a ratio of 3:1
by the Federal Government and partnering private institutions.
As a requirement of participation, couples will receive
training that helps them repair their credit, set a budget and
savings schedule, and manage their money. The Capital Area
Asset Building Corporation [CAAB], a non-profit organization
which is already assisting low-income individuals through a
network of community service providers, will manage this new
program. The MDAs will be held by CAAB at local financial
institutions.

Pre-Marriage Development Accounts

The Committee is also providing funds for pre-Marriage
Development Accounts [pMDAs], which will be available to
engaged couples, each of whom is 18 or older and whose combined
adjusted gross income is less than $50,000 and whose total net
worth is less than $10,000. These accounts will also be
available to individuals aged 16-22 who are not married, do not
have children, and whose adjusted gross income is less than
$25,000 (non-dependant individual's income) or $50,000
(dependant individual's household income). pMDAs will give
young people and couples who are about to be married the
financial tools and life skills training to make positive
choices and well-informed plans for the future. pMDAs will help
engaged couples build a strong financial and emotional
foundation to help foster successful and long-term marriages.
pMDAs will also help low-income youths gain a longer-term
perspective and provide incentives and training to make
economically--and emotionally--sound life decisions.

Implementation

The Committee is providing $1,500,000 to the Capital Area
Asset Building Corporation [CAAB] to implement MDAs and pMDAs.
CAAB is a non-profit organization currently serving a
consortium of community service providers which are working
with low-income families and individuals in the District of
Columbia. CAAB will establish the MDAs and will jointly hold
deposits with a qualified financial institution. Of the funds
provided, the Committee intends that $400,000 shall be for
program planning, marketing, evaluation account administration,
and services to account holders.
For each dollar that the couple or youth deposits, CAAB
will reserve a $3 match in a separate parallel account, using
Federal and private or local funds. The Committee directs CAAB
to provide an accounting of all funds deposited--Federal,
local, and private--by June 30, 2006.
When the accountholder has accumulated enough savings and
matching funds to purchase the asset and has completed a
financial education course, payments from the MDA will be made
directly to the asset provider such as a university or a
financial institution. Couples who open an account and
subsequently attend at least four marriage counseling classes
will be eligible for a bonus of $300 for their account.

Restrictions on Funds

MDAs and pMDAs may only be used to: (1) buy a home; (2) pay
for post-secondary education or vocational training; or (3)
start or expand a small business. Accountholders must attend at
least 8 hours of financial education prior to withdrawing the
matching funds to purchase the asset. Asset-specific training
will also be available. The funds in the accounts must be
invested within 3 years and the matched amount will only be
paid directly to the asset provider such as a college or a job
training facility or a financial institution. At the end of the
3 year period, any match funds that are not used shall be
returned to the general match pool so that these funds may be
reallocated to new enrollees. The couple must then withdraw any
of their own savings from the MDA and transfer them to their
bank account.
Engaged couples must marry prior to withdrawing funds from
their pMDAs. Upon marriage, couples will receive a $200 bonus
to pay for costs associated with marriage licenses and other
fees. If the couple does not marry, neither will be entitled to
the Federal-private matching funds in the account. In the event
of certain life circumstances, one partner may receive half of
the match. These life circumstances are limited to the death of
the fiance, a conviction of a felony or misdemeanor crime of
the fiance, or an indictment for domestic violence.
Single individuals aged 16-22 who remain unmarried and
childless may contribute to their accounts for up to 4 years.
The participating community service providers will provide
credit counseling, debt management counseling, and asset-
specific training. Couples who participate in pre-marital and
marital counseling will receive a $300 bonus in their accounts.
Unmarried youths will be required to receive life-skills
training, and to work with mentors to develop long-term
education, job training, and asset-building goals.
CAAB and its participating service providers shall work
with the East Capitol Center for Change and its network of
faith-based organizations and the National Center for Fathering
to ensure that these services are offered to all
accountholders.

Federal Match

The Committee is requiring that for every $3 in Federal
funds for MDAs and pMDAs, the Capital Area Asset Building
Corporation provide $1 in matching funds which shall be
obtained from private entities.
No more than a total of $9,000 of Federal and private
matching funds may be provided to any participating married or
engaged couple and no more than $4,500 of Federal and private
matching funds may be provided to unmarried youths.

Promoting Successful Marriages and Encouraging Positive Life Decisions

The Committee is providing $650,000 for the East Capitol
Center for Change [ECCC] and $850,000 for the National Center
for Fathering [NCF] to work with local churches and other
faith-based organizations to provide marriage counseling,
couples mentoring, couples coaching, marriage retreats, ``Dad
training,'' and community outreach. Both ECCC and NCF will work
with CAAB and its participating service providers to provide
account holders with life skills counseling, couples mentoring,
and youth mentoring (which will include relationship counseling
and abstinence counseling). ECCC and NCF will work with the
faith community to provide pre-marital and marital counseling
and relationship mentors and coaches for participating couples.
Recognizing the importance of grassroots support to ensure
the success of these efforts, the Committee directs ECCC and
NCF to expand their network of service providers by developing
partnership with local churches, faith-based organizations, and
other non-profit organizations. The Committee expects that ECCC
and NCF will provide technical assistance and training to their
partners in order to replicate the successful models which they
are currently using.
The Committee has included bill language requiring CAAB,
ECCC, and NCF to submit detailed expenditure plans within 30
days of enactment of the bill. In addition, the Committee is
directing CAAB to provide detailed program requirements
governing MDAs and pMDAs that comport with the above report
language with 30 days of enactment of the bill.

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR LATINO YOUTH INITIATIVE

The Committee is concerned about the problems and
challenges facing many Latino youth in the District of
Columbia. Latino youth make up more than 25 percent of the
under-18 population in the District of Columbia, compared to 10
percent nationally. Many of these young people do not have
adequate access to key services including health insurance,
health care and education and job training. The Latino dropout
rate in the District is estimated to be in the range of 50
percent. In addition, Latino families earned 54 percent less
than the average District resident which is significant since
income level is often affects educational achievement.
Educational disparities are especially acute for English
Language Learners who constitute a majority of Latino students
in the District.
A study released earlier this year by the Equal Rights
Center documented that Spanish-speaking applicants for services
such as Medicaid or Children's Health Insurance experienced
some form of discrimination about 50 percent of the time in
their encounters with the Department of Health, often when
applying for coverage on behalf of Latino children who are U.S.
citizens. This is troubling, especially since Latinos in the
District are more likely than other Americans to experience
certain health problems such as obesity, diabetes, heart
disease, and certain cancers.
The Committee has also learned that Latino youth are
disproportionately represented in the various stages of the
criminal justice system in the District. Data from the D.C.
Metropolitan Police Department, showed that while the total
number of arrests decreased from 1999 to 2000, the number of
arrests of Latinos increased by almost 25 percent.
For these reasons, the Committee has included $2,000,000 to
begin a Latino youth initiative in the District.

Strengthening Latino Youth Programs

The Committee is providing $1,250,000 to The National
Council of La Raza [NCLR] to improve health and educational
outcomes of Latino children and promote violence prevention
among Latino youth in the District. Working in partnership with
its community-based affiliates in the Metropolitan area, NCLR
will establish a multi-faceted demonstration project focused on
health, education, and violence prevention among Latino
children and youth in the region. This initiative will build on
and be integrated into existing, successful NCLR programs that
serve and collaborate with low-income Latino children and
youth.
A key component of this effort will be the development of
cadres of promotores or lay community promoters as a primary
pathway to deliver culturally competent and language
appropriate information to Latino communities on health and
violence prevention.
The objective of NCLR's work in the District will be to
mobilize Latinos to take action in improving their children's
health status and preventing violence and promoting well-being
in their communities. One such strategy, the use of promotores,
has been pioneered by NCLR and its affiliates in a number of
health-related contexts, mainly in the Southwest. NCLR proposes
to expand this approach to the D.C. region, target it toward
children's health, and to study its potential effectiveness as
a tool for gang-related violence prevention. NCLR's will also
support, promote, and document the implementation of these
demonstration programs to inform policy and practice more
broadly across the region and the Nation.
The Committee intends that resources will be divided among
the core health and gang violence elements of the program and
will support the work of the partner community-based affiliates
in the D.C. area. Within each core element of the program, the
Committee expects the bulk of the resources will be allocated
to program interventions.

Improving Latino Education

The Committee has included $400,000 for the Mid Atlantic
Equity Consortium, Inc. [MAEC] to administer a Latino Education
Initiative. MAEC will administer a program aimed at reducing
dropout rates and increasing achievement of Latino students,
especially those who are English Language Learners [ELL]. MAEC
will use research on Latino student achievement and available
community resources to make policy recommendations. The
Committee intends that MAEC should serve as the fiscal agent
for these funds and may contract with or sub-grant to eligible
entities in order to carry out the intent of the funding.
Of this amount, the Committee has included sufficient funds
for a Latino Education Director who will oversee and coordinate
citywide efforts to improve educational opportunities and
outcomes for Latino students.
The Committee is informed that MAEC has expertise in this
area and has been working with DCPS on related issues for
several years. Because it is an independent nonprofit, it has
the ability to work citywide to ensure that ELL and Latino
students are well-served whether they attend DCPS, charter, or
non-public schools.
MAEC will coordinate the recruitment and hiring of the
Latino Education Director. The Director will have
responsibility to coordinate with all relevant parties: the
District Government, DCPS, Charter Schools, Non-Public Schools,
and community-based organizations involved in serving Latino
students.
The Committee is also providing $400,000 for the Latin
American Youth Center [LAYC] YouthBuild Public Charter School
[YouthBuild PCS], a newly approved charter school that takes to
scale a highly successful program that the LAYC has operated
for 10 years. The YouthBuild program has worked with D.C.'s
most troubled youth--high school dropouts, former gang members,
teen parents, adjudicated youth--and helped them obtain a GED
and gain job skills in the construction industry while creating
housing for homeless and low-income D.C. residents.
The Committee understands that the YouthBuild Public
Charter School combines academics and vocational training in
one of D.C.'s fastest-growing job markets; benefits the
community by rehabilitating low-income housing while teaching
students construction skills; and is a proven program being
taken to a larger scale.
The promotion of education reform in small alternative
settings in our Nation's capital has been a priority for the
Congress. The YouthBuild PCS is fostering that reform by taking
the most disconnected and disadvantaged youth in the Nation's
capital and ensuring that the educational system works for them
as well.

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR PRISONER RE-ENTRANT HOUSING

The Committee is providing $3,000,000 for a Prisoner
Reentrant Housing Initiative in the District of Columbia.

Many Ex-Offenders Face Homelessness

The Committee understands that every year 2,500 former
prisoners return home to the District. Returning offenders are
assigned to the Court Services and Offender Supervisor Agency
[CSOSA] for release plan investigation during parole or
probation term. Those who cannot identify a safe place to live
are assigned to halfway houses where their stays are capped at
120 days.

Preventing Homelessness can Reduce Recidivism

The Committee believes strongly that reducing the
likelihood of homelessness for those exiting the halfway house
system is critical to combating recidivism among returning
prisoners. Stable housing increases the likelihood that the
offender will successfully complete his or her term of parole
or supervised release, find and maintain employment, maintain
family relationships, and access the programs and services that
contribute to successful reentry. CSOSA originally brought this
issue to the attention of the D.C. Department of Housing and
Community Development [DHCD] in December 2004, noting the
relationship between stable housing and offenders' compliance
with the conditions of community supervision. An important
aspect of supervision is the offender's growing awareness of,
and participation in, community-based social services; this
occurs during the term of supervision and constitutes a
critical stage of the reentry process. Currently, the D.C.
reentry initiative offers individuals exiting the criminal
justice system direct services and access to 30 community-based
nonprofit organizations. Unity health care provides health
services through a clinic designed specifically for reentrants.
The Department of Employment Services provides job readiness
and job placement services at its offices, and case workers
assist reentrants in obtaining GED certification and enrollment
in college courses at UDC.
The Committee is aware that ex-offenders are faced with
rebuilding their lives as they seek to join the workforce,
support their families and become productive members of
society. Despite successes in delivery of social and health
care services, there is a very pressing need for affordable
housing.

Incentives to Provide Housing for Ex-Offenders

The Committee intends that the funding provided be used to
offer incentives to encourage developers and non-profit
organizations to rehabilitate or construct new housing for
reentrants in order to increase the pool of available housing
for those exiting the criminal justice system. Construction
funding will be administered by the District's Department of
Housing and Community Development [DHCD], which has the
infrastructure in place to monitor housing construction
incentives as part of the Housing Production Trust Fund. DHCD
will issue a special Notice of Funding Availability [NOFA] to
solicit developers of these housing units. The NOFA will
include the following restrictions on developers using the
funds: (1) the developer must derive reentrant tenants from
designated non-profit support service agencies, (2) the units
must be dedicated to reentrants for a period of at least 25
years, (3) the operating funds for the first 6 months of
tenancy will be eligible project expenses.

Federal-Local Partnership

The Committee directs the District to partner with the
federally-funded Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency
[CSOSA] in this effort, which provides parole supervision
services. The Committee understands that the District will
offer participants access to job readiness and employment
opportunities, healthcare services, education, child care,
substance abuse counseling, and mental health services.

Rental Reimbursement for On-site Mentors

The Committee believes that mentors play a crucial role in
helping ex-offenders successfully reintegrate into society by
providing them with emotional, psychological, spiritual and
motivational support. Mentors can help ex-offenders find
employment, make sure that they attend counseling sessions, and
encourage them to reconcile with family members.
A portion of the funds provided by the Committee is for
rental reimbursements for mentors who agree to live in the same
housing development as the ex-offenders. Since these mentors
will live in close proximity to the program participants, they
will be much more accessible and better able to provide one-on-
one support. As a condition of receiving these funds, the
District must work with CSOSA to match mentors with
participants. CSOSA has trained 200 mentors to date through its
Faith-Based Reentry Initiative. The Committee believes that
these mentors will make excellent candidates for this program.
Recognizing the significant Latino population in the District,
the Committee directs the District and CSOSA to ensure that
participants are matched with bilingual mentors.

Concerns About Overcrowding at D.C. Jail

The Committee is disappointed that the Council of the
District of Columbia reduced the proposed fiscal year 2006
local funds budget for the D.C. Department of Corrections by
$4,000,000 at a time when there is serious overcrowding at the
D.C. Jail. The Committee believes that this cut will impair the
Department's ability to fully and securely staff its facilities
and will also limit its ability to move jail inmates to
available beds in nearby contract facilities. The Committee
urges the Council, the Mayor, and the D.C. Department of
Corrections to rectify this funding shortage.

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR THE NATIONAL GUARD YOUTH CHALLENGE PROGRAM

The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 for the
creation of a D.C. National Guard Youth Challenge Program for
at-risk youth. Youth ChalleNGe is a community-based program to
help youth obtain a GED or high school diploma through
mentoring, leadership and citizenship training, and community
service.

USE OF FEDERAL LANDS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The Committee is pleased that the President has recently
proposed legislation to convey more than 200 acres of Federal
land to the District. The Committee believes that converting
Federal land to local use will not only enable the District to
broaden its constricted tax base, but will allow the District
to make better use of these land parcels. According to the
Mayor, this transfer will ``simultaneously create economic
opportunity, improve life for many D.C. residents and advance
home rule.'' The Committee notes that the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget described the administration's
proposal as a ``first step in a broader examination of
underutilized Federal lands that may be considered for future
conveyance to the District.'' To facilitate and expedite the
better use of these properties, the Committee directs the
District to seek the independent assistance of a firm to
conduct an assessment of reuse options through, among other
things, land transfers, revised lease arrangements, and joint
ventures to determine the best use of the parcels. The firm
should have extensive experience and an in-depth knowledge of
all facets of the real estate capital markets and real estate
valuation. In addition to industry knowledge, the firm should
be independent and have an understanding and appreciation of
the various stakeholders with an interest in the land survey
program. The Committee directs the District to report on its
progress with respect to firm recruitment and a plan for the
Federal land survey by March 31, 2006.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LOCAL OPERATING BUDGET

The Committee recommends a total of $8,700,158,000 for the
operating expenses of the District of Columbia as contained in
the fiscal year 2006 budget submitted to the Congress by the
Government of the District of Columbia on June 6, 2005. Of the
total, $5,007,344,000 is from local funds, $1,921,287,000 is
from Federal grant funds, $1,754,399,000 is from other funds,
$17,129,000 is from private funds, and $163,116,000 is from
prior year funds. The Committee directs that any changes to the
financial plan as submitted by the District must follow the
reprogramming guidelines.
The following tables detail the revenue and expenses plan
of the District for fiscal year 2006:

FISCAL YEAR 2006 FINANCIAL PLAN
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grants and
Local Funds Other Revenue Gross funds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revenues
Local Sources:
Property Taxes............................................ 1,242,479 .............. 1,242,479
Sales Taxes............................................... 876,129 .............. 876,129
Income Taxes.............................................. 1,405,670 .............. 1,405,670
Gross Receipts............................................ 246,891 .............. 246,891
Other Taxes............................................... 330,364 .............. 330,364
Licenses and Permits...................................... 66,470 .............. 66,470
Fines and Forfeitures..................................... 113,613 .............. 113,613
Charges/Services.......................................... 56,436 .............. 56,436
Miscellaneous............................................. 416,335 .............. 416,335
Fund Balance Use.......................................... 591,642 .............. 591,642
Transfers to Capital...................................... (30,000) .............. (30,000)
Revenue Proposals/Onetime Revenues........................ 8,729 .............. 8,729
-------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Local Revenues................................. 5,324,758 .............. 5,324,758
=================================================
Federal and Other Sources:
Federal Payments.......................................... ............... 34,500 34,500
Federal Grants............................................ ............... 1,904,539 1,904,539
Private Grants............................................ ............... 16,213 16,213
-------------------------------------------------
Subtotal Federal Sources Revenues....................... ............... 1,955,252 1,955,252
=================================================
Other Financing Sources:
Lottery Transfer.......................................... 73,100 .............. 73,100
=================================================
Total General Fund Revenues............................. 5,397,858 1,955,252 7,353,110
=================================================
Expenditures
Current Operating:
Governmental Direction and Support........................ 340,859 171,975 512,834
Economic Development and Regulation....................... 328,156 118,312 446,468
Public Safety and Justice................................. 827,037 10,577 837,614
Public Education System................................... 1,189,302 240,194 1,429,496
Human Support Services.................................... 1,307,530 1,405,819 2,713,349
Public Works.............................................. 366,101 8,375 374,476
Financing and Other....................................... 588,717 .............. 588,717
Cash Reserve (Budgeted Contingency)....................... 50,000 .............. 50,000
Lease Purchase Costs...................................... ............... .............. ...............
-------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Operating Expenditures........................ 4,997,702 1,955,252 6,952,954
=================================================
Paygo Capital............................................. 207,083 .............. 207,083
Transfer to Trust Fund for Post-Employment Benefits....... 138,000 .............. 138,000
General Fund Contribution to Capital Fund Balance......... 53,800 .............. 53,800
-------------------------------------------------
Total General Fund Expenditures......................... 5,396,585 1,955,252 7,351,837
=================================================
Operating Margin, Budget Basis............................ 1,273 .............. 1,273
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GOVERNMENTAL DIRECTION AND SUPPORT
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill compared with--
Approved Fiscal year Fiscal year --------------------------
Agency/activity fiscal year 2006 Intra- 2006 less Committee Intra- Committee Fiscal year Fiscal year
2005 request District Intra- recommendation District recommendation 2005 2006
district approved request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA............................... 12,809 14,038 ............ 14,038 14,038 ............ 14,038 1,230 ...........
OFFICE OF THE D.C. AUDITOR........................................ 1,784 2,008 ............ 2,008 2,008 ............ 2,008 224 ...........
ADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSIONS................................. 976 976 ............ 976 976 ............ 976 ............ ...........
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR............................................... 10,439 13,454 (110) 13,343 13,454 (110) 13,343 3,014 ...........
OFFICE OF SECRETARY............................................... 3,679 4,241 ............ 4,241 4,241 ............ 4,241 563 ...........
CUSTOMER SERVICE OPERATIONS....................................... 1,052 1,048 (695) 353 1,048 (695) 353 (3) ...........
OFFICE OF CITY ADMINISTRATOR...................................... 111,424 173,880 (584) 173,297 173,880 (584) 173,297 62,456 ...........
OFFICE OF RISK MANAGEMENT......................................... 2,023 2,365 (500) 1,865 2,365 (500) 1,865 343 ...........
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL............................................... 14,056 13,544 (2,594) 10,950 13,544 (2,594) 10,950 (511) ...........
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT....................................... 1,978 2,000 ............ 2,000 2,000 ............ 2,000 22 ...........
OFFICE OF FINANCE AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT......................... 188,016 200,888 (190,259) 10,630 200,888 (190,259) 10,630 12,873 ...........
OFFICE OF CONTRACTING AND PROCUREMENT............................. 12,334 14,642 (1,653) 12,989 14,642 (1,653) 12,989 2,308 ...........
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER............................ 44,685 43,474 (4,052) 39,422 43,474 (4,052) 39,422 (1,211) ...........
OFFICE OF PROPERTY MANAGEMENT..................................... 61,625 69,346 (49,795) 19,551 69,346 (49,795) 19,551 7,721 ...........
CONTRACT APPEALS BOARD............................................ 764 806 ............ 806 806 ............ 806 42 ...........
BOARD OF ELECTION & ETHICS........................................ 4,805 5,042 ............ 5,042 5,042 ............ 5,042 237 ...........
OFFICE OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE........................................ 1,324 1,374 ............ 1,374 1,374 ............ 1,374 50 ...........
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RELATIONS BOARD................................... 776 801 ............ 801 801 ............ 801 25 ...........
OFFICE OF EMPLOYEE APPEALS........................................ 1,536 1,589 ............ 1,589 1,589 ............ 1,589 53 ...........
METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS.................... 926 440 ............ 440 440 ............ 440 (486) ...........
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE DISTRICT OF CO- LUMBIA..... 62,381 66,275 (2,392) 63,883 66,275 (2,392) 63,883 3,894 ...........
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL................................... 11,295 12,942 ............ 12,942 12,942 ............ 12,942 1,647 ...........
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER............................. 107,054 124,242 (3,951) 120,291 124,242 (3,951) 120,291 17,189 ...........
EMERGENCY PURCHASE CARDS.......................................... ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, GOVERNMENTAL DIRECTION AND SUPPORT................... 657,740 769,418 (256,585) 512,834 769,418 (256,585) 512,834 111,678 ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill compared with--
Approved Fiscal year Fiscal year --------------------------
Agency/activity fiscal year 2006 Intra- 2006 less Committee Intra- Committee Fiscal year Fiscal year
2005 request District Intra- recommendation District recommendation 2005 2006
district approved request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY MAYOR OF PLANNING............................ 22,309 42,980 ............ 42,980 42,980 ............ 42,980 20,671 ...........
OFFICE OF PLANNING................................................ 6,512 6,673 ............ 6,673 6,673 ............ 6,673 162 ...........
OFFICE OF LOCAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT.............................. 1,040 1,438 ............ 1,438 1,438 ............ 1,438 398 ...........
OFFICE OF MOTION PICTURES AND TELEVISION.......................... 564 579 ............ 579 579 ............ 579 15 ...........
OFFICE OF ZONING.................................................. 2,581 2,902 ............ 2,902 2,902 ............ 2,902 321 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT..................... 145,265 210,710 ............ 210,710 210,710 ............ 210,710 65,445 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SERVICES................................. 88,345 93,048 (2,534) 90,514 93,048 (2,534) 90,514 4,702 ...........
BOARD OF APPEALS AND REVIEW....................................... ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
BOARD OF REAL PROPERTY ASSES. & APPEALS........................... 342 431 ............ 431 431 ............ 431 89 ...........
DEPARTMENT CONSUMER & REGULATORY AFFAIRS.......................... 37,247 40,251 (106) 40,145 40,251 (106) 40,145 3,003 ...........
COMMISSION ON ARTS & HUMANITIES................................... 9,918 (20) 9,898 9,918 (20) 9,898 9,918 ............
ALCOHOL BEVERAGE REGULATION ADMINISTRATION........................ 4,877 4,702 ............ 4,702 4,702 ............ 4,702 (175) ...........
DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.................. ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION......................................... 7,656 7,976 ............ 7,976 7,976 ............ 7,976 320 ...........
OFFICE OF THE PEOPLE'S COUNSEL.................................... 3,885 4,306 ............ 4,306 4,306 ............ 4,306 421 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, SECURITIES AND BANKING................... 13,675 14,158 ............ 14,158 14,158 ............ 14,158 483 ...........
OFFICE OF CABLE TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS................. 4,000 5,054 ............ 5,054 5,054 ............ 5,054 1,054 ...........
HOUSING AUTHORITY SUBSIDY......................................... ........... 4,003 ............ 4,003 4,003 ............ 4,003 4,003 ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION.................. 338,298 449,128 (2,660) 446,468 449,128 (2,660) 446,468 110,830 ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PUBLIC SAFETY AND JUSTICE
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill compared with--
Approved Fiscal year Fiscal year --------------------------
Agency/activity fiscal year 2006 Intra- 2006 less Committee Intra- Committee Fiscal year Fiscal year
2005 request District Intra- recommendation District recommendation 2005 2006
district approved request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT.................................... 372,561 377,488 (5,398) 372,089 377,488 (5,398) 372,089 4,926 ...........
FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT............................ 145,364 156,268 (368) 155,900 156,268 (368) 155,900 10,904 ...........
POLICE OFFICERS' & FIRE FIGHTERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM............... 112,100 117,500 ............ 117,500 117,500 ............ 117,500 5,400 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS......................................... 121,447 132,686 (1,934) 130,751 132,686 (1,934) 130,751 11,239 ...........
NATIONAL GUARD.................................................... 3,253 3,428 ............ 3,428 3,428 ............ 3,428 175 ...........
D.C. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY.................................. 5,030 5,495 ............ 5,495 5,495 ............ 5,495 465 ...........
COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL DISABILITIES & TENURE...................... 213 218 ............ 218 218 ............ 218 5 ...........
JUDICIAL NOMINATION COMMISSION.................................... 118 126 ............ 126 126 ............ 126 8 ...........
OFFICE OF POLICE COMPLAINTS....................................... 1,756 2,095 ............ 2,095 2,095 ............ 2,095 339 ...........
D.C. SENTENCING COMMISSION........................................ 581 662 ............ 662 662 ............ 662 81 ...........
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER.............................. 6,762 9,265 ............ 9,265 9,265 ............ 9,265 2,503 ...........
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS................................. 6,647 7,057 (1,164) 5,893 7,057 (1,164) 5,893 410 ...........
CORRECTIONS INFORMATION COUNCIL................................... 155 155 ............ 155 155 ............ 155 (0) ...........
CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COUNCIL............................. 1,550 1,576 ............ 1,576 1,576 ............ 1,576 26 ...........
FORENSICS LABORATORY TECHNICIAN TRAINING PROGRAM.................. 800 800 ............ 800 800 ............ 800 ............ ...........
OFFICE OF UNIFIED COMMUNICATIONS.................................. 30,217 31,662 ............ 31,662 31,662 ............ 31,662 1,444 ...........
EMERGENCY AND DISASTER RESPONSE................................... ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, PUBLIC SAFETY AND JUSTICE............................ 808,553 846,479 (8,864) 837,615 846,479 (8,864) 837,615 37,926 ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill compared with--
Approved Fiscal year Fiscal year --------------------------
Agency/activity fiscal year 2006 Intra- 2006 less Committee Intra- Committee Fiscal year Fiscal year
2005 request District Intra- recommendation District recommendation 2005 2006
district approved request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.C. PUBLIC SCHOOLS............................................... 962,496 1,033,194 (54,157) 979,037 1,033,194 (54,157) 979,037 70,699 ...........
TEACHERS' RETIREMENT FUND......................................... 9,200 15,500 ............ 15,500 15,500 ............ 15,500 6,300 ...........
STATE EDUCATION OFFICE............................................ 82,388 78,449 ............ 78,449 78,449 ............ 78,449 (3,939) ...........
D.C. PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOLS....................................... 196,802 239,284 ............ 239,284 239,284 ............ 239,284 42,483 ...........
UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA............................ ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBSIDY.................... 49,602 57,873 ............ 57,873 57,873 ............ 57,873 8,270 ...........
D.C. PUBLIC LIBRARY............................................... 32,402 34,473 (320) 34,153 34,473 (320) 34,153 2,071 ...........
COMMISSION ON ARTS & HUMANITIES................................... 5,357 ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. (5,357) ...........
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA EDUCATIONAL INVESTMENT FUND.................. ........... 21,000 ............ 21,000 21,000 ............ 21,000 21,000 ...........
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CHARTER SCHOOLS INVESTMENT FUND.............. ........... 4,200 ............ 4,200 4,200 ............ 4,200 4,200 ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM.............................. 1,338,246 1,483,973 (54,477) 1,429,496 1,483,973 (54,477) 1,429,496 145,727 ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HUMAN SUPPORT SERVICES
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill compared with--
Approved Fiscal year Fiscal year --------------------------
Agency/activity fiscal year 2006 Intra- 2006 less Committee Intra- Committee Fiscal year Fiscal year
2005 request District Intra- recommendation District recommendation 2005 2006
district approved request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES...................................... 442,380 414,015 (198) 413,817 414,015 (198) 413,817 (28,365) ...........
CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES AGENCY.................................. 220,802 236,762 (44,284) 192,478 236,762 (44,284) 192,478 15,960 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH....................................... 208,506 229,545 (42,917) 186,628 229,545 (42,917) 186,628 21,038 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.............................................. 1,637,183 1,729,326 (8,842) 1,720,484 1,729,326 (8,842) 1,720,484 92,143 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION................................ 43,971 51,340 (7,450) 43,890 51,340 (7,450) 43,890 7,369 ...........
OFFICE ON AGING................................................... 21,133 21,415 (225) 21,190 21,415 (225) 21,190 282 ...........
PBC TRANSITION.................................................... ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION FUND.................................... 8,124 7,124 ............ 7,124 7,124 ............ 7,124 (1,000) ...........
DISABILITY COMPENSATION FUND...................................... 29,600 30,281 ............ 30,281 30,281 ............ 30,281 681 ...........
OFFICE OF HUMAN RIGHTS............................................ 2,514 5,032 ............ 5,032 5,032 ............ 5,032 2,518 ...........
OFFICE ON LATINO AFFAIRS.......................................... 4,462 4,485 (830) 3,655 4,485 (830) 3,655 22 ...........
D.C. ENERGY OFFICE................................................ 17,839 21,147 (326) 20,820 21,147 (326) 20,820 3,308 ...........
CHILDREN AND YOUTH INVESTMENT FUND................................ 5,068 8,068 ............ 8,068 8,068 ............ 8,068 3,000 ...........
BROWNFIELD REMEDIATION............................................ ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
ASIAN AND PACIFIC ISLANDER AFFAIRS................................ 353 540 ............ 540 540 ............ 540 186 ...........
OFFICE OF VETERANS AFFAIRS........................................ 239 251 ............ 251 251 ............ 251 12 ...........
MEDICAID RESERVE.................................................. ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
INCENTIVES FOR ADOPTION OF CHILDREN............................... ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH REHABILITATION SERVICES....................... ........... 61,327 (2,237) 59,090 61,327 (2,237) 59,090 61,327 ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL HUMAN SUPPORT SERVICES................................ 2,642,174 2,820,657 (107,308) 2,713,349 2,820,657 (107,308) 2,713,349 178,482 ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PUBLIC WORKS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill compared with--
Approved Fiscal year Fiscal year --------------------------
Agency/activity fiscal year 2006 Intra- 2006 less Committee Intra- Committee Fiscal year Fiscal year
2005 request District Intra- recommendation District recommendation 2005 2006
district approved request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS........................................ 105,220 115,530 (20,488) 95,043 115,530 (20,488) 95,043 10,310 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION...................................... 31,579 39,005 (214) 38,791 39,005 (214) 38,791 7,426 ...........
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES...................................... 40,790 46,530 (162) 46,369 46,530 (162) 46,369 5,740 ...........
D.C. TAXI CAB COMMISSION.......................................... 1,258 1,362 ............ 1,362 1,362 ............ 1,362 104 ...........
WASHINGTON METRO AREA TRANSIT COMMISSION.......................... 95 110 ............ 110 110 ............ 110 15 ...........
WASHINGTON METRO AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY........................... 166,633 187,632 ............ 187,632 187,632 ............ 187,632 20,999 ...........
SCHOOL TRANSIT SUBSIDY............................................ 4,670 5,169 ............ 5,169 5,169 ............ 5,169 499 ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, PUBLIC WORKS......................................... 350,245 395,339 (20,863) 374,476 395,339 (20,863) 374,476 45,094 ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FINANCING AND OTHER
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill compared with--
Approved Fiscal year Fiscal year --------------------------
Agency/activity fiscal year 2006 Intra- 2006 less Committee Intra- Committee Fiscal year Fiscal year
2005 request District Intra- recommendation District recommendation 2005 2006
district approved request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESERVE........................................................... ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
REPAYMENT OF LOANS AND INTEREST................................... 347,700 370,778 ............ 370,778 370,778 ............ 370,778 23,078 ...........
REPAYMENT OF GENERAL FUND DEFICIT................................. ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS............................................. 4,000 5,500 ............ 5,500 5,500 ............ 5,500 1,500 ...........
INAUGURAL EXPENSES................................................ ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION..................................... 15,252 15,000 (4,000) 11,000 15,000 (4,000) 11,000 (252) ...........
SETTLEMENTS AND JUDGMENTS......................................... 20,270 20,655 ............ 20,655 20,655 ............ 20,655 385 ...........
WILSON BUILDING................................................... 3,633 3,740 ............ 3,740 3,740 ............ 3,740 107 ...........
WORKFORCE INVESTMENTS............................................. 38,114 61,110 ............ 61,110 61,110 ............ 61,110 22,996 ...........
TOBACCO TRUST FUND................................................ ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
NON-DEPARTMENTAL.................................................. 13,946 36,286 ............ 36,286 36,286 ............ 36,286 22,340 ...........
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND SECURITY FUND.............................. 14,880 ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. (14,880) ...........
ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES............................................. ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) PROGRAM............................. ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
CASH RESERVE...................................................... 50,000 50,000 ............ 50,000 50,000 ............ 50,000 ............ ...........
GRANT DISALLOWANCE................................................ ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
EQUIPMENT LEASE OPERATING......................................... 23,109 35,441 (8,000) 27,441 35,441 (8,000) 27,441 12,332 ...........
EMERGENCY AND CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUNDS........................... ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
PAY-GO CONTINGENCY................................................ 43,137 ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. (43,137) ...........
PAY-GO CAPITAL.................................................... 6,531 260,883 ............ 260,883 260,883 ............ 260,883 254,352 ...........
DEBT SERVICE--ISSUANCE COSTS...................................... ........... 40,000 ............ 40,000 40,000 ............ 40,000 40,000 ...........
SCHOOLS MODERNIZATION FUND........................................ ........... 12,208 ............ 12,208 12,208 ............ 12,208 12,208 ...........
DISTRICT RETIREE HEALTH CONTRIBUTION.............................. ........... 138,000 ............ 138,000 138,000 ............ 138,000 138,000 ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, FINANCING AND OTHER.................................. 580,572 1,049,600 (12,000) 1,037,600 1,049,600 (12,000) 1,037,600 469,028 ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ENTERPRISE FUNDS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill compared with--
Approved Fiscal year Fiscal year --------------------------
Agency/activity fiscal year 2006 Intra- 2006 less Committee Intra- Committee Fiscal year Fiscal year
2005 request District Intra- recommendation District recommendation 2005 2006
district approved request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY......................................... 287,206 295,710 ............ 295,710 295,710 ............ 295,710 8,504 ...........
WASHINGTON AQUEDUCT............................................... 47,972 50,512 ............ 50,512 50,512 ............ 50,512 2,540 ...........
STORM WATER....................................................... 3,792 6,673 ............ 6,673 6,673 ............ 6,673 2,881 ...........
D.C. LOTTERY & CHARITABLE GAMES CONTROL BOARD..................... 247,000 251,000 ............ 251,000 251,000 ............ 251,000 4,000 ...........
SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT COMMISSION............................... 7,322 339,630 ............ 339,630 339,630 ............ 339,630 332,308 ...........
D.C. RETIREMENT BOARD............................................. 15,277 30,078 ............ 30,078 30,078 ............ 30,078 14,801 ...........
CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES........................................... ........... ........... ............ ........... .............. ............ .............. ............ ...........
WASHINGTON CONVENTION CENTER AUTHORITY............................ 77,176 78,900 ............ 78,900 78,900 ............ 78,900 1,724 ...........
NATIONAL CAPITAL REVITALIZATION CORPORATION....................... 7,849 52,731 ............ 52,731 52,731 ............ 52,731 44,882 ...........
UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA............................ 90,575 102,200 (5,730) 96,470 102,200 (5,730) 96,470 11,625 ...........
D.C. OFFICE OF PERSONAL AGENCY TRUST FUND......................... 953 1,100 ............ 1,100 1,100 ............ 1,100 147 ...........
D.C. PUBLIC LIBRARY TRUST FUNDS................................... 17 17 ............ 17 17 ............ 17 ............ ...........
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION FUND.................................... 180,000 180,000 ............ 180,000 180,000 ............ 180,000 ............ ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, ENTERPRISE FUNDS..................................... 965,140 1,388,551 (5,730) 1,382,821 1,388,551 (5,730) 1,382,821 423,411 ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Provisions

The Committee has modified section 104 and section 105 to
allow the District to use locally-generated funds for lobbying
purposes. The Committee has included language to maintain a
complete prohibition on the use of Federal funds for this
purpose.
The Committee has modified section 117 to allow the
District to use locally-generated revenues to support programs
that provide individuals with sterile needles and syringes.
This is consistent with a provision approved by the Senate and
included in the Senate bill since fiscal year 2003. The
Committee has included language that maintains a complete
prohibition on the use of Federal funds for this purpose.
The Committee has included language (sec. 127) that allows
the District, based upon revenue certified by the District's
Chief Financial Officer, to increase by 25 percent, the amount
appropriated for non-tax revenues or ``Other-Type'' funds and
to increase by 6 percent the amount appropriated from all other
fund sources within the District's operating budget. The
language retains congressional oversight by requiring
notification to the committees prior to the expenditure of any
increased amount.
The Committee has included language (sec. 128) that would
allow the District to borrow from its emergency and contingency
reserve funds for cash flow management purposes. Among other
restrictions, the provision allows for borrowing only when the
amount in each fund is above 50 percent and then only to the
extent that such borrowing does not deplete the fund below a 50
percent threshold. In addition, the provision requires the
District to replenish any funds borrowed within 9 months or by
the end of the fiscal year, whichever occurs earlier.
The Committee has included language (sec. 131) that conveys
15 acres of Federal Park Service land to the District of
Columbia to be used for educational purposes. This conveyance
of title for educational purposes reflects the mutual interest
of the Committee and the District of Columbia to provide a
suitable campus environment for a public boarding school to
prepare more District students for success in college and the
professional world. The Committee joins with District leaders
in supporting public boarding school as a critical component of
the District's education portfolio and an important
contribution to national education reform. In addition, the
Committee fully supports and encourages the District's
commitment to collaborating closely with a community
organization to develop the plan for a boarding school on the
described land.
The Committee expects that the lease will be executed not
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
subsection; will lease the described land without consideration
to a non-profit District of Columbia corporation to develop,
manage, and administer a boarding school for the public
welfare; will be for a long term, and shall provide for a
renewal of the initial term; and will be assignable by the
lessee for the purpose of securing indebtedness of the lessee,
except that any successor in interest to the lessee shall
utilize the property for an educational institution for the
public welfare.
The Committee bill includes provisions (sec. 132 and sec.
133) that extend through fiscal year 2006, the authority of the
Office of the Chief Financial Officer [OCFO] over personnel,
procurement, and the preparation of fiscal impact statements.
The intent of the Committee is to exempt all aspects of the
OCFO's contracting and procurement from the District of
Columbia's Procurement Practices Act and to extend the OCFO's
independent personnel authority and its authority to prepare
fiscal impact statements during the post control board period.
The Committee bill includes language (sec. 134 and sec.
135) to ensure that annuitants retired from the Secret Service
are entitled to receive appropriate annual pay increases.
The bill contains a provision (sec. 137) to authorize the
District to establish a separate title for the Anacostia
Waterfront Corporation from funds currently appropriated under
the Economic Development title in the District's fiscal year
2006 appropriation. This provision does not increase the
District's overall appropriation request.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously
passed by the Senate during that session.''
Items providing funding for fiscal year 2006 which lack
authorization are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal payment for emergency planning and security costs $12,000,000
in the District of Columbia...............................
Federal payment for the Water and Sewer Authority.......... 5,000,000
Federal payment for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative.... 3,000,000
Federal payment for transportation......................... 1,000,000
Federal payment for foster care improvements............... 2,000,000
Federal payment for the Office of the Chief Financial 16,500,000
Officer...................................................
Federal payment for bioterrorism and forensics lab......... 5,200,000
Federal payment for the National Guard Youth Challenge 500,000
Program...................................................
Federal payment for marriage development................... 3,000,000
Federal payment for Latino Youth Initiative................ 2,000,000
Federal payment for prisoner reentrant housing............. 3,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 21, 2005,
the Committee ordered reported, en bloc S. 1446, an original
bill making appropriations for the District of Columbia and
other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the
revenues of said District for the fiscal year ending September
30, 2006, and for other purposes, H.R. 2528, making
appropriations for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs,
and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2006, and for other purposes with an amendment in the nature of
a substitute and an amendment to the title; and H.R.3058,
making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation,
Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006,
and for other purposes, with an amendment in the nature of a
substitute, provided that the bill be subject to further
amendment and the bill be consistent with its budget
allocation, by a recorded vote of 28-0, a quorum being present.
The vote was as follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Cochran
Mr. Stevens
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Craig
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. DeWine
Mr. Brownback
Mr. Allard
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson
Ms. Landrieu

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by
the Committee.''

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICIAL CODE

* * * * * * *

TITLE 3.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

SUBTITLE I

GENERAL.

* * * * * * *

Chapter 3

Armory Board.

* * * * * * *

Subchapter II. Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium.

* * * * * * *

Sec. 3-326. TITLE TO STADIUM TO VEST IN UNITED STATES; DATE; CONVEYANCE
AND LEASE TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; NON-
TRANSFERABILITY; USES OF PROPERTY; REVERSION FOR
NONCOMPLIANCE.

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(d)(1) The instrument of conveyance and the lease referred
to in subsection (c) of this section shall provide that all
right, title, and interest conveyed to the District of Columbia
pursuant to such instrument of conveyance shall revert to the
United States and the lease shall terminate if:

* * * * * * *

(4) Any property which reverts to the Secretary under this
subsection shall be administered by the Secretary as part of
the Park System of the Nation's Capital in accordance with the
provisions of the Act of August 25, 1916 (16 U.S.C.
Sec. Sec. 1, 2-4), and other provisions of the law generally
applicable to units of the national park system.
(e)(1) Upon receipt of a written description from the
District of Columbia of not more than 15 contiguous acres
(hereinafter referred to as ``the 15 acres''), with the longest
side of the 15 acres abutting one of the roads bounding the
property, within the area designated ``D'' on the revised map
entitled ``Map to Designate Transfer of Stadium and Lease of
Parking Lots to the District'' and bound by Oklahoma Avenue,
NE, Benning Road, NE, the Metro line, and C Street, NE, and
execution of a long-term lease that is contingent up the
Secretary's conveyance of the 15 acres and for the purpose
consistent with this paragraph, the Secretary shall convey the
15 acres described land to the District of Columbia for the
purpose of siting, developing, and operating an educational
institution for the public welfare, with first preference given
to a pre-collegiate public boarding school.
(2) Upon conveyance, the portion of the stadium lease that
affects the15 acres on the property and all the conditions
associated therewith shall terminate, and the 15 acres property
shall be removed from the ``Map to Designate Transfer of
Stadium and Lease of Parking Lots to the District'', and the
long-term lease described in paragraph (1) shall take effect
immediately.

* * * * * * *

TITLE 5

POLICE, FIREFIGHTERS, AND CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER

* * * * * * *

Chapter 7

Police and Firefighters Retirement and Disability.

* * * * * * *

Subchapter I. Retirement and Disability, 1916.

* * * * * * *

Sec. 5-745. PENSION RELIEF ALLOWANCE OR RETIREMENT COMPENSATION
INCREASE.

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(e) This section shall not apply with respect to officers
and members of the Metropolitan Police force or the Fire
Department of the District of Columbia who retire after the
effective date of this subsection.
(f) This section shall not apply with respect to any
annuitant retired from the United States Secret Service
Division, other than an annuitant retired from the United
States Secret Service Uniformed Division.

Sec. 5-745A. ANNUITY INCREASE FOR UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE
DIVISION.

(a) Each annuitant retired from the United States Secret
Service Division, other than an annuitant retired from the
United States Secret Service Uniformed Division, shall be
entitled to receive an increase annually equal to the General
Schedule overall average pay increase that is effective in
accordance with title 5 of the United States Code, section
5303.
(b) In the event that an annuity increase cannot be
determined under subsection (a) because title 5 of the United
States Code, section 5303, is superseded or nullified, then
each annuitant retired from the United States Secret Service
Division, other than an annuitant retired from the United
States Secret Service Uniformed Division, shall be entitled to
receive an increase annually under the provisions of title 5 of
the District of Columbia Code, section 5-718 (c-1) and (c-2).

* * * * * * *

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005, PUBLIC LAW 108-335

* * * * * * *

TITLE I--FEDERAL FUNDS

* * * * * * *

Federal Payment for School Improvement

For a Federal payment for a school improvement program in the
District of Columbia, $40,000,000, to be allocated as follows:
for the District of Columbia Public Schools, $13,000,000 to
improve public school education in the District of Columbia;
for the State Education Office, $13,000,000 to expand quality
public charter schools in the District of Columbia, to remain
available until September 30, 2006; for the Secretary of the
Department of Education, $14,000,000 to provide opportunity
scholarships for students in the District of Columbia in
accordance with division C, title III of the District of
Columbia Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108-199; 118
Stat. 126), of which up to $1,000,000 may be used to administer
and fund assessments: Provided, That of the $13,000,000 for the
District of Columbia Public Schools, not less than $2,000,000
shall be for a new incentive fund to reward high performing or
significantly improved public schools; not less than $2,000,000
shall be to support the Transformation School Initiative
directed to schools in need of improvement: Provided further,
That of the remaining amounts, the Superintendent of the
District of Columbia Public Schools shall use such sums as
necessary to provide grants to schools which are not eligible
for other programs referenced under this heading, and to
contract for management consulting services and implement
recommended reforms: Provided further, That the Comptroller
General shall conduct a financial audit of the District of
Columbia Public Schools: Provided further, That of the
$13,000,000 provided for public charter schools in the District
of Columbia, $2,000,000 shall be for the City Build Initiative
to create neighborhood-based charter schools; $2,750,000 shall
be for the Direct Loan Fund for Charter Schools; $150,000 shall
be for administrative expenses of the Office of Charter School
Financing and Support to expand outreach and support of charter
schools; $100,000 shall be for the D.C. Public Charter School
Association to enhance the quality of charter schools;
[$4,000,000] $4,000,000, to remain available until expended,
shall be for the development of an incubator facility for
public charter schools; $2,000,000 shall be for a charter
school college preparatory program; and [$2,000,000 shall be
for a new incentive fund] $2,000,000, to remain available until
expended, shall be for a new incentive fund to reward high
performing or significantly improved public charter schools:
Provided further, That the District of Columbia government
shall establish a dedicated account for the Office of Charter
School Financing and Support (the Office) that shall consist of
the Federal funds appropriated in this Act, any subsequent
appropriations, any unobligated balances from prior fiscal
years, any additional grants, and any interest and principal
derived from loans made to Charter Schools, and repayment of
dollars utilized to support credit enhancement earned in this
or any fiscal year: Provided further, That the account shall be
under the control of the District of Columbia Chief Financial
Officer who shall use those funds solely for the purposes of
carrying out the Credit Enhancement Program, Direct Loan Fund
Grant Program, and any other charter school financing under the
management of the Office: Provided further, That in this and
subsequent fiscal years the Office of the Chief Financial
Officer shall conduct an annual audit of the funds expended by
the Office and provide an annual financial report to the Mayor,
the Council of the District of Columbia, the Office of the
District of Columbia Treasurer and the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate for
these funds showing, by object class, the expenditures made and
the purpose therefor: Provided further, That not more than
$250,000 of the total amount appropriated for this program may
be used for administrative expenses and training expenses
related to the cost of the National Charter School
Conference(s) to be hosted by December 2006; and no more than 5
percent of the funds appropriated for the direct loan fund may
be used for administrative expenses related to the
administration and annual audit of the direct loan, grant, and
credit enhancement programs.

* * * * * * *

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays
---------------------------------------------------
Committee Amount of Committee Amount of
allocation bill allocation bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations
to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution
for 2006: Subcommittee on the District of Columbia:
Discretionary........................................... 593 593 581 \1\ 580
Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation:
2006.................................................... ........... ........... ........... \2\ 509
2007.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 56
2008.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 18
2009.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 10
2010 and future years................................... ........... ........... ........... ...........
Financial assistance to State and local governments for NA 392 NA 366
2006.......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

NA: Not applicable.

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2006
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
or -)
Item 2005 Budget estimate House allowance Committee --------------------------------------------------
appropriation \1\ recommendation 2005 House allowance
appropriation Budget estimate \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TITLE I

FEDERAL FUNDS

Federal payment for Resident 25,395 33,200 33,200 33,200 +7,805 ............... ...............
Tuition Support.................
Federal payment for Emergency 14,880 15,000 15,000 12,000 -2,880 -3,000 -3,000
Planning and Security Costs in
the District of Columbia........
Federal payment to the District 189,274 221,693 221,693 218,912 +29,638 -2,781 -2,781
of Columbia Courts..............
Defender Services in District of 38,192 45,000 45,000 45,000 +6,808 ............... ...............
Columbia Courts.................
Federal payment to the Court 178,560 203,388 203,388 201,388 +22,828 -2,000 -2,000
Services and Offender
Supervision Agency for the
District of Columbia............
Federal payment to the District 4,762 ............... 10,000 5,000 +238 +5,000 -5,000
of Columbia Water and Sewer
Authority.......................
Federal payment for the Anacostia 2,976 5,000 5,000 3,000 +24 -2,000 -2,000
Waterfront Initiative \2\.......
Federal payment to the Criminal 1,290 1,300 1,300 1,300 +10 ............... ...............
Justice Coordinating Council....
Federal payment for the Unified 5,952 ............... ............... ............... -5,952 ............... ...............
Communications Center...........
Federal payment for Public School 5,952 ............... ............... ............... -5,952 ............... ...............
Libraries.......................
Federal payment for the Family 992 ............... ............... ............... -992 ............... ...............
Literacy Program................
Federal payment for 2,480 ............... ............... 1,000 -1,480 +1,000 +1,000
Transportation Assistance.......
Federal payment for Foster Care 4,960 ............... ............... 2,000 -2,960 +2,000 +2,000
Improvements....................
Federal payment to the Office of 32,240 ............... 20,000 16,500 -15,740 +16,500 -3,500
the Chief Financial Officer of
the District of Columbia........
Federal payment for School 39,680 41,616 41,616 40,000 +320 -1,616 -1,616
Improvement.....................
Federal payment for Bioterrorism 7,936 7,200 7,200 5,200 -2,736 -2,000 -2,000
and Forensics Labs..............
Federal payment for the National ............... ............... ............... 500 +500 +500 +500
Guard Youth Challenge in the
District of Columbia............
Federal payment for Marriage ............... ............... ............... 3,000 +3,000 +3,000 +3,000
Development Accounts............
Federal payment for Latino youth ............... ............... ............... 2,000 +2,000 +2,000 +2,000
Initiative......................
Federal payment for Prisoner ............... ............... ............... 3,000 +3,000 +3,000 +3,000
Reentrant Housing...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Federal funds to the 555,521 573,397 603,397 593,000 +37,479 +19,603 -10,397
District of Columbia......

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses............... (7,168,491) (8,700,158) (8,700,158) (8,700,158) (+1,531,667) ............... ...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, District of Columbia (7,168,491) (8,700,158) (8,700,158) (8,700,158) (+1,531,667) ............... ...............
funds.....................
======================================================================================================================
Grand total:
Federal Funds to the 555,521 573,397 603,397 593,000 +37,479 +19,603 -10,397
District of Columbia..
District of Columbia (7,168,491) (8,700,158) (8,700,158) (8,700,158) (+1,531,667) ............... ...............
funds.................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ H.R. 3058.
\2\ Funds are for the Anacostia Riverwalk and Trail construction.