This article was updated on March 4 to include Chief Financial Officer Glen Lee’s response to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser.
The D.C. Council started off the month of March on one accord, as it relates to mandating federal officer transparency. The 13-member body also took on a similar tone regarding keeping information— like their strategy around the decoupling quandary— out of the public eye.
This edition of The Collins D.C. Council Report focuses on both issues.
Further, this report delves into foreign policy matters, something that D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D) doesn’t deem relevant to the council, despite the intersection of local, national and international politics in the nation’s capital.
While Federal Officers Continue to Shoot and Kill, the D.C. Council Approves Two Transparency Bills
As families fight for body-camera footage from federal officer-involved shootings, the D.C. Council advanced a couple of bills aimed at increasing transparency in situations when federal agents use force or kill someone.
For some local organizers, like Alex Dodds, the D.C. Council should’ve responded much sooner. She said its laxness lies at the feet of D.C. Councilmember Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2), chair of the council’s Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety.
“Community members have asked her for months, since the start of this occupation and even before, to take action in response to federal actors in the District, who are operating in the District, and for months, there has been no answer from her,” said Dodds, co-founder of Free DC. “I’m very glad that she is finally taking action today. It’s concerning that it has only happened because other council members have grown so frustrated that they have taken action in her place.”
On March 3, the council unanimously approved the Body-Worn Camera Transparency for Use of Force Emergency Amendment Act and the Full Accountability in Arrest Reporting Emergency Amendment Act, introduced by Pinto and D.C Councilmember Robert White (D-At large), respectively.
By the time the council took action, D.C. Councilmember Brianne Nadeau (D-Ward 1) had already explored human rights violations during a Committee on Public Works roundtable.
D.C. Councilmember Janeese Lewis George (D-Ward 4) had also introduced the Safe Community Places and Policing Amendment Act, which, among other things, prohibits the District from transporting federal agency officers during civil immigration enforcement without a judicial warrant or court order.
Pinto’s bill requires the Metropolitan Police Department’s (MPD) release of body-worn camera footage during instances when officers are at the scene of a deadly officer-involved shooting or serious use of force involving a federal agent. This legislation comes a couple of months after community members testified before Pinto about federal intrusion.
It also comes on the heels of a performance oversight hearing that didn’t yield much information from Interim Metropolitan Police Chief Jeffery Carroll about federal officer activity.
On Tuesday, Pinto advanced her legislation with an amendment ensuring retroactive application to Aug. 1, 2025. Earlier, she told reporters that she went to great lengths to ensure her bill wouldn’t receive any pushback.
“This is why I’ve been working on this for six weeks, working with all of the different stakeholders that we have to explain what we’re trying to accomplish and why we think this transparency is important,” Pinto said.
White’s bill included a provision similar to what’s found in Pinto’s legislation, along with elements requiring that MPD include, in its arrest reports and probable cause affidavits, instances of use of force and names of all law enforcement officers present at the scene of an arrest.
In the hours leading to the Tuesday legislative meeting, White yielded to Pinto, one of his opponents in the D.C. delegate race, by removing the body-camera portion of his legislation. He also advanced an amendment aimed at ensuring that the legislation wouldn’t trample on the D.C. Office of the Attorney General’s prosecution efforts.
White called his concession to Pinto part of the greater good.
“The work I’m doing here on police transparency is consistent with the work that I’ve done over the years,” White said, “and what I’ve also done over the years is trying to work with colleagues. That’s why there were nine of us that co-introduced my bill. But still, it is important to have a unified message.”
The passage of these bills comes amid three incidents involving federal agents, all of which happened in Ward 7. The latest incident, on Feb. 13, led to the death of Julian Bailey at the hands of a yet-to-be-identified U.S. marshal.
Months before that incident, a Homeland Security Investigation special agent shot at Philip Brown during a traffic stop near 44th Street and Benning Road NE. MPD didn’t include the shooting, during which bullets nearly struck Brown, in its arrest report.
That omission, which an MPD officer revealed during a court proceeding, led to a court dropping charges against Brown.
Weeks later, a federal agent shot at Justin Brian Nelson during a vehicular pursuit. Brown and Nelson’s family, with the support of grassroots activists, have since pressed the D.C. Council for a solution that provides the public with access to body camera footage and other data related to federal agents.
White credited those grassroots organizers as the key impetus in moving the needle forward.
“I wanna start by thanking Free DC, Movimiento Migrante, the Families Not Feds Coalition, Migrant Solidarity, Mutual Aid, and the many community members who have advocated tirelessly for District residents and have worked with me to get this legislation to this point,” White said Tuesday on the dais.
White also hinted at the council’s full support, and what it signified at the moment.
“From federal officers shooting at Philip Brown’s car to the murder of Julian Bailey by U.S. Marshals, our current laws aren’t cutting it,” White said. “Right now, we hold MPD officers to a standard of conduct and transparency, but don’t apply those same rules to feds that are now actively policing our city. This bill says loud and clear federal law enforcement can’t harm District residents without transparency and appropriate consequences.”
Bowser, whose mayoral order solidified the post-surge relationship between MPD and federal law enforcement, has a different take on the council’s actions. In her March 3 letter to D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson, she said that the council is tackling issues best left to Congress.
“Congress has oversight over federal law enforcement agencies and can require a mask prohibition (which they are debating now) as well as body-worn cameras and name identification,” Bowser’s letter said. “I urge members of the council to seek congressional action on these matters.”
At least one council member— Ward 5’s Zachary Parker (D)— doesn’t want to leave things to chance.
“I’m voting for this measure today because it is the right thing to do, and because I don’t trust Congress to stand up to the president,” Parker said on the dais, “and because we must do everything in our power to protect fellow brown and other residents that we serve.
The Decoupling Situation That Has Yet to be Settled
On Tuesday, the council closed off a portion of its usually transparent breakfast meeting to discuss its response to the conundrum that’s the fallout from the congressional disapproval resolution.
Hours after that meeting, the council was no closer to a solution, according to Councilmember Lewis George of Ward 4.
“D.C. government has to move together, united,” Lewis George told The Informer. “In order to do that, we’ve got to have communication and conversation and agree on the best path forward and the best strategy forward. That’s where the hang-up is.”
Weeks after Bowser administration members painted a grim picture of what’s ahead for the next four years, Lewis George said that the lack of a resolution further complicates financial matters.
“There’s some real big budget considerations,” Lewis George said, “and I think whether to recouple or decouple has huge budget implications for everyone. The biggest holdup is how we move forward in a way that…when we go into the budget process, we do so with the amount of funds we actually have to budget those funds.”
Since Congress’ passage, and President Donald J. Trump’s signing of the disapproval resolution, which reverses the council’s decoupling of the D.C’s tax code from the GOP-endorsed “Big Beautiful Bill,” District Attorney General Brian Schwalb has written an opinion casting doubt on its legality.
Schwalb’s letter cited, among other reasons, the disapproval resolution’s passage after the end of the 30-day congressional approval timeline. The legal opinion, deemed a victory for District legislative autonomy, would soon fizzle when Chief Financial Officer Glen Lee’s February revenue estimate didn’t include the $180 million to be allocated through the decoupling.
In her letter to Lee, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, who’s currently working to close a $1.1 billion shortfall in her Fiscal Year 2027 budget proposal, asked that Lee clarify his stance on Schwalb’s opinion by March 3.
“Your office has not changed the April 15 tax filing deadline, which strongly implies you agree with the attorney general’s legal opinion that the DC Income and Franchise Tax Conformity and Revision Temporary Amendment Act of 2025 (DC Law 26-89) is in effect,” Bowser’s letter said. “[Y]our February revenue estimate inexplicably does not include any of that revenue. If you concur with the attorney general’s opinion, then the resulting collections represent revenue that must be accounted for in the February revenue estimate.”
Bowser said she’s making her demand for clarity on behalf of her constituents.
“If your position is that DC Law 26-89 is not in effect, then you have an obligation to District taxpayers to revise their tax liabilities and adjust the tax filing deadline to accommodate updated tax forms and guidance,” Bowser’s letter said.
On Wednesday, a day later than what Bowser requested, Lee told her and Mendelson that he would honor the current tax season timeline while still declining to include decoupling-related funds in the revenue estimate.
“There is considerable risk and uncertainty, from litigation or other actions, to the revenues associated with the District’s decoupling legislation,” Lee’s letter to the mayor and council chair said. “Consistent with the OCFO’s ongoing practice related to uncertain revenue collections, the OCFO will continue to defer including decoupling revenues from the revenue estimates.”
On Tuesday, Councilmember Parker, who didn’t speak much about the legislative body’s closed-door deliberations, focused on the bigger picture: collaboration between all branches of government, and the ever-glaring perils of not having statehood.
“There’s still a need for the CFO, the attorney general, the mayor, and the council to get on the same page,” he told reporters on Tuesday. “Right now I’m not sure where various entities are. It’s a bit frustrating, but legislating can be messy. Government can be messy, and I think it’s important for District residents to remember we’re here because Congress is interfering yet again in local affairs.”
As the decoupling dilemma remains unresolved, some District residents are carrying on as usual. Per OCFO, at least 75,000 District residents have filed taxes as of February. On Monday, Mendelson weighed in on the situation, saying that the District could rake in well beyond $180 million in tax revenue via decoupling.
“It’s actually $250 or $260 million,” Mendelson said. “For one year, it’s maybe $180 million, but for the tax filings right now, there is a retroactivity that goes back to 2024 and 2023. We added all of it [and] it’s about $260 million.”
As Mendelson recounted, he learned about Lee’s February revenue estimates, and the reasoning behind it, one day prior to its release. Two years after they clashed over the use of reserve funds, Mendelson is once again standing in opposition to Lee’s actions.
“I think the chief financial officer has gone too far in trying to protect the cash,” Mendelson told reporters on Monday. “Now, that doesn’t seem to be on point with this issue of coupling or decoupling, but it’s actually related. So the decoupling brings in about $700 million over the financial plan. It doesn’t show up in the revenue estimates. If it’s not in the revenue estimates, then the mayor can’t budget against it. It’s almost like hoarding cash.”
Keya Chatterjee, Free DC co-founder, expressed similar thoughts, telling The Informer that, amid federal intrusion and congressional interference, the D.C. government needs as much money as possible to do right by its residents.
“People are going to be hurt,” Chatterjee said. “Those who have the least are going to be hurt the most. This is part of a pattern of dividing people and then denigrating them.”
Chatterjee said that the CFO shouldn’t be a “willing participant” in the GOP’s plan.
“One thing that sometimes we forget in D.C. is that the CFO is accountable, ultimately, to the people of D.C. The CFO is hired by the mayor and the CFO can be fired by the mayor and two-thirds of the council…If that is what we have to do, then that is what we have to do.”
Since President Donald J. Trump’s return to the Oval Office, Chatterjee and her comrades have stood on the front lines as the Trump administration and a Republican-dominated Congress challenged District home rule. On Tuesday, she pointed out that Trump’s actions aren’t for naught.
“All of this is part of a concerted effort to try to make dissent impossible in the capital of this country so that they can prevent a transfer of power,” Chatterjee told The Informer. “When you look at the last time this regime was supposed to leave office and how they reacted to being told they had to leave, that was when January 6th happened. They’re now trying to lay the groundwork to never have to leave office again and attacks on D.C. are essentially efforts that are complicit in that right now.”
Another Chance to Tackle Foreign Affairs?
Throughout much of the latest iteration of U.S.-supported Israeli attacks against Palestinians, local activists have pressed council members to pass a resolution in opposition to the humanitarian crisis unfolding on the Gaza Strip.
The U.S., under the leadership of Trump has since gone further, acting on Israel’s behalf by bombing Iran and killing Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Amid the drastic escalation, at least one organizer is reigniting the call for the D.C. Council to make its voice heard.
“They should have an emergency resolution calling for an end to U.S. bombs around the globe. An all-encompassing resolution,” Dante O’Hara told The Informer. “The Middle East and that North African region is going to be lit up in flames. This is exposing the contradictions of ‘U.S. assets’ that exist around the world, which are obviously capital assets and big business, but also these U.S. military bases that are all throughout the Middle East and the world.”
On March 1, during the homegoing service of the late Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler, O’Hara recounted his efforts and that of numerous comrades to convince council members to advance an emergency resolution denouncing Israel’s bombing of Gaza.
With Ward 4 Councilmember Lewis George behind him waiting to give remarks, and D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D) in the pews next to where he was sitting, O’Hara criticized the council’s inaction.
One day later, while speaking with The Informer, he said that inaction, in part, set the stage for the military campaign that took place on Feb. 28, and other attacks beforehand.
“There are people occupied in a lot of these countries that are continuing to be bombed,” said O’Hara, former organizing lead for the Claudia Jones School for Political Education. “What just took place in Iran and what has been taking place, like in the Caribbean and Venezuela and Cuba, and even Nigeria has troops on the ground that no one’s talking about, even with the state bombing that took place before the Venezuelan kidnapping.”
O’Hara went on to mention that the recent offensive against Iran, much like the District government’s cooperation with federal law enforcement, could end up affecting District residents more directly.
“We don’t talk about nuclear war much anymore in this country and in this generation, but that is a real possibility that could take place,” O’Hara said. “Bombs murder so many people already, but a nuclear catastrophe can be possibly a hundred times worse. I don’t think anyone wants that.”
In 2002, the council approved an emergency resolution to weigh in on President George W. Bush’s use of wartime powers against Iraq. The resolution, written after a congressional vote that didn’t include Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), called for diplomacy while highlighting the dangerous precedent set by Bush’s unilateral move.
Kathleen Patterson, then chair of the council’s Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety, said the resolution counted among a handful passed at the local and state level in the months leading up to the March 19, 2003 invasion of Iraq.
“The language wasn’t opposed to taking action, but [it was about] setting up criteria we think the president should meet before taking action,” said Patterson, speaking in her personal capacity. “The most important was congressional action, but also we shouldn’t act without any kind of threat and there should be consensus among allies, [and] understanding the extent and cost.”
Patterson, who currently serves as D.C. auditor, acknowledged that, under current circumstances, the D.C. Council wouldn’t be able to make a move.
“The context is quite different,” Patterson said. “Congress hasn’t voiced anything [and] quite candidly, the District is under a kind of microscope that we weren’t under then. It would be more difficult politically to take that kind of action.”
Mendelson, then one of 10 council members who voted in approval of the resolution, questioned the effectiveness of a resolution denouncing the Trump administration’s recent actions.
“We’re not responsible for foreign policy, and I don’t think that a resolution from the council is really going to make a difference in terms of decisions by the president or the federal government,” Mendelson told The Informer on Monday. “I think the appropriate body to comment with regard to acts of war would be the Congress, not the city council. I don’t think the District of Columbia has a greater role in foreign policy than, let’s say, the city council of Los Angeles or Chicago.”
By March 3, the fourth day of the U.S.-Israeli military campaign known as Operation Epic Fury, nearly 800 casualties had been reported, a portion of which were schoolchildren killed during a strike on a girls’ elementary school.
Additionally, at least six U.S. service members have been killed by Iranian missile strikes. As District residents, and residents of other U.S. jurisdictions for that matter, suffer from quality-of-life issues, O’Hara remains adamant that the D.C. Council should weigh in on this foreign affairs matter.
“We don’t want D.C. residents going to…a rich man’s imperialist war overseas. That’s the immediate thing that’s pretty obvious to me that I think would resonate with D.C. residents,” O’Hara said. “Additionally, there’s U.S. taxpayer money. We talk about ICE and the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ and the tax decoupling for D.C. government and funding for all these, some social safety net programs. All that’s gone. Folks are going to be paying all this money for war and destruction to ‘protect ourselves’ as opposed to really addressing the immediate issues of poverty and housing, education and health care in our own communities.”