[WardFive] FYI October 2

Thanks Jackie McCray

 

Lamond-Riggs Library Design/Build Team Announced

The Lamond-Riggs Library, at 5401 South Dakota Ave. NE, will be rebuilt. The project is fully funded at $20 million. The design/build team is Consigli and HGA. Planning for the new library begins in October.
 
Community engagement is a critical part of the design process. You can provide input through meetings, surveys, focus groups and online feedback. Learn more about the project and community input opportunities.  

 

Thanks KPW

 

 

A Convincing, New Phone Phishing Scam Wants Your Banking Secrets. Here's How to Stay Secure

Scammers have a new trick up their sleeves to extract financial details and personal information from people, but it's not through better "phishing" email or sophisticated confidence games. Instead, it relies on something old fashioned: phone calls, sometimes from humans and sometimes automated.

The scam works like this: A victim receives a phone call that may be a live person, an automated message system, or a voice-response system programmed to act like it's a live person. The Caller ID will show—either by phone number, name, or both—a financial institution or cellular operator at which the person has an account.

Next, the person or recording provides some details and tells the person they're the victim of fraud and that they need to provide details—often including their account PIN—to set up a replacement card or freeze an account.

With that information in hand, the scammers can quickly manufacture ATM or debit cards, and make withdrawals or purchases. Or they can use online banking to transfer money or issue checks. Some scams simply collect information and then sell it to third parties.

Security writer Brian Krebs has documented a disturbing trend in attacks that rely on these phishers having obtained personal or private details from a victim. This may include part or all of a Social Security number, a credit card, and a home address.

Voice-based scamming isn't new, and senior citizens lose tens of billions of dollars a year in the U.S. to fraud, a good portion by phone.

But the twist here is how much information these newer phishers have and the polish of the live people involved in the scam. These new attacks are so convincing that they took in two savvy Internet veterans who spoke to Krebs. One of them gave over all his info, while the other barely stopped short.

Part of what makes this attack so convincing is the phishers' manipulation of Caller ID, which is an unverified system, making it entirely unreliable. With very little effort, a scammer can generate any phone number and text they want, in order to to appear as a reputable institution.

The trick to avoid voice-based scams is an old one: Never provide or confirm any private or financial details when you receive a call from a business. If asked, tell the caller you will call back.

Never use a phone number provided by a scammer, either. Always call the business back at a phone number provided on a card you have from it, or by visiting its web site.

Banks and credit-card companies will never ask for your PIN by phone, and if there's a reason they need to call you, they verify themselves by providing information, but don't ask you for anything beyond your name.

If you're asked for personal details or account secrets, hang up. Some of these phishers may get aggressive, threatening the police, FBI, penalties, or a lawsuit. In that case, ask for a name and number—it's always a scam, but it's also likely the fraudster ends the call at that point or provides fake information.

 

D.C. Council Votes 8-5 to Repeal Initiative 77, Only Second Vote Looms

The emergency legislation delaying its implementation also passed.

Darrow MontgomeryThe five-month long saga that turned the District's hospitality industry upside down is almost over. Today, eight councilmembers voted to repeal Initiative 77, a ballot measure that voters passed 56 percent to 44 percent in June. The mandatory second vote will take place later this month. In the meantime, the Council passed emergency legislation that delays the implementation of 77 until March, preventing it from taking effect on Oct. 9.. 

Initiative 77 sought to eliminate the two-tier wage system where employers can pay tipped workers a lower base minimum wage ($3.89) instead of the standard minimum wage ($13.25). Tips from customers make up the difference, and if tips fail to carry a worker's earnings over the standard minimum wage, the employer is required to pay the remainder. 

Initiative 77 would have phased out the tipped minimum wage in eight increments until it reached $15 in 2025. Starting in 2026, there would no longer have been a tip credit—all workers would have been paid the same minimum wage directly from their employer. 

Shortly after the measure passed, Council Chairman Phil Mendelson introduced a bill calling for an all-out repeal of Initiative 77. Councilmembers Jack Evans, Anita Bonds, Vince Gray, Kenyan McDuffie, Brandon Todd, and Trayon White joined him as co-sponsors.

Following much discussion and a 16-hour hearing, this group of legislators and At-Large Councilmember David Grosso voted for the repeal. 

The arduous, emotional road to this conclusion illuminated several points in what was consistently touted in rhetoric as "the city's second most important industry" after government. Wage theft occurs despite existing labor laws and sexual harassment is prevalent in bars and restaurants.

The national labor organization that got Initiative 77 on the ballot, Restaurant Opportunities Centers United (ROC), stressed that when workers are paid the full minimum wage directly from their employer, they're less reliant on tips and less susceptible to harassment and abuse from patrons and management. Opponents of Initiative 77 pointed out that since the ballot measure doesn't eliminate tipping, it's not the panacea for solving one of the industry's most serious problems. 

Though it won't give staunch supporters of Initiative 77 much solace, there are a few strategies built into the repeal bill to address some of these issues such as an anonymous tip line to call in wage theft claims and mandatory sexual harassment training. They appear to be borrowed in large part from Councilmember Elissa Silverman's compromise amendment that failed earlier this morning by a vote of 8-5. 

One possible obstacle is that Chief Financial Officer Jeffrey S. DeWitt notes in a financial impact statement that some of the extra provisions in the repeal bill such as the sexual harassment training, cost money and can't be implemented until room is made in the budget. DeWitt's office estimates the implementation of the bill will cost $744,000 in fiscal year 2019 and $2.6 million over the four-year financial plan. 

Despite this, it would be shocking if Mayor Muriel Bowser didn't sign the repeal bill. She has spoken out against Initiative 77 from the beginning and held a roundtable discussion with anti-77 tipped workers Friday where she restated her conviction to support the repeal..

"I have consistently stood up and spoke for D.C. workers who do not want to see their wages decreased and that's exactly what will happen if Initiative 77 goes into effect," Bowser said. "What the Council heard in hours and hours and hours of testimony is that Initiative 77 would do exactly that—decrease the wages of thousands of workers across the District of Columbia." 

There is precedent for overturning such a ballot initiative. ROC used a similar approach in Maine. But after the referendum passed, the state overturned it. The November 2016 referendum would have gradually raised the tipped minimum wage from $3.75 to $12 in 2024.

Where do we go from here? While tipped workers and restaurant owners who opposed Initiative 77 were the loudest, arguing that the increased labor costs would lead to job cuts, closures, and higher prices for consumers, there were tipped workers who say they could not come forward to voice their support for the initiative out of fear of retaliation from their employers.

Those tipped workers who did come forward, along with community advocates, researchers, and other supporters, shared concerns of racial and income disparities among bar and restaurant workers who may work at very different types of establishments. The wards that voted most favorably for Initiative 77 were predominantly African-American, for example.

The question now is whether the conversation about the professionalization of restaurant and bar workers will remain on the front burner along with topics of inclusivity, safety, and equity.  

DC Council Votes to Move Forward with Amended Airbnb Bill

by Nena Perry-Brown

The property formerly known as Mount Vernon Triangle Bed and Breakfast. Click to enlarge.

Last week, UrbanTurf  reported on DC Council's latest attempt at a bill to regulate use of Airbnb and similar short-term rental platforms in the city. Today, the Council voted to move that bill forward.

As currently written, the "Short-term Rental Regulation and Affordable Housing Protection Act of 2017" will ban DC residents from renting out second homes on Airbnb and similar services. The bill would also limit the number of days that a primary residence could be rented while the owner is not present to 90 days annually. 

An amendment proposed by Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen to raise the maximum from 90 to 120 days for homeowners renting out their primary residence when they are not present failed to pass muster. "There is some data out there that suggests that, when you get beyond that 90-day point, it really incentivizes commercialization," Ward 5 Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie stated in response to the amendment. "It incentivizes people to take long-term housing off the long-term rental market in favor of more lucrative short-term housing." Allen ended up voting for the bill while expressing hope to continue negotiating with the other councilmembers to seek areas of compromise prior to the second reading and final vote later this month.

Several glaring instances of short-term rentals leeching apartments off the market have been observed over the past few years, from a residential community's fight to stay open while cracking down on illegal rental activity to Attorney General Karl Racine's pursuit of companies operating "apartels" (apartments-as-hotels).

Although some councilmembers (Brianne Nadeau and Brandon Todd, in particular) noted their and their constituents' desire to be able to list a second unit for short-term rental, Nadeau cited the urgency of needing to enact a regulatory structure to prevent abuse of short-term rentals for profit as her reasoning for voting for the legislation.

"For me, it's not about restricting families who are trying to make ends meet, trying to make a bit of extra cash," Nadeau stated. "But there are commercial entities in this city that are taking advantage of the fact that we don't have regulations in place right now." Airbnb has released studies noting the prevalence of seniors and teachers using the service to supplement their incomes.

Following the Council vote, Airbnb released the following statement:

"Today, the DC Council voted to put the interests of the hotel cartel ahead of DC residents, and according to the city's own projections creates a $96 million unfunded mandate and robs DC's communities of color of $25 million annually in supplemental income. There's a better way forward and we are ready and willing to work with the Council between now and October 16th to create rules that work."