jonetta rose barras: Sexual harassment, John Falcicchio and the DC government — what a mess

John Falcicchio’s sexual harassment of women under his supervision may not have risen to the level of that perpetrated by the notorious Hollywood producer and filmmaker Harvey Weinstein. However, the serial nature of the abuse performed by Mayor Muriel Bowser’s former chief of staff, deputy mayor for planning and economic development and principal political confidant is an extremely serious matter in its own right.

Recent investigations of Falcicchio’s behavior and my reporting lead me to assert that the District has a sexual harassment problem. 

This week, the Mayor’s Office of Legal Counsel (MOLC) concluded its investigation into harassment claims against Falcicchio by a second staffer in the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED). The same office upheld a first complainant’s allegations of sexual harassment by Falcicchio in an investigation completed in mid-June. 

In the newly completed investigation, the MOLC substantiated two of four allegations, finding that he made physical sexual advances during five incidents in 2020 — four of them at his apartment, according to the summary report. He also sent “unwanted, flirtatious messages” and asked personal questions about other romantic relationships in an attempt to gain the woman’s trust.

The MOLC, which houses the sexual harassment officer covering the Executive Office of the Mayor, conducted “18 interviews with 13 individuals,” comprised of “both current and former District employees who were identified as possibly having knowledge related to the Complainant’s allegations.” However, most of the interviewees suggested that they knew nothing about the sexual harassment claims until they became public, according to Vanessa Natale, the MOLC’s deputy director.

Charges of retaliation by Falcicchio and of “retaliatory treatment by a senior staffer at DMPED” could not be substantiated. “Based on the record and Complainant’s description of the treatment, this does not appear to be rooted in sexual harassment and does not fall within the scope of Mayor’s Order 2017-313,” investigators wrote of the claim related to actions of that staffer. 

During a press conference on Monday where the report was briefly discussed, Natale explained: “Saying something is unsubstantiated is not denying it happened. It means we didn’t have evidence and facts to substantiate” the allegation. 

Bowser said she was “grateful to [the investigators] for handling a thorough process and working diligently to get the investigation concluded and the summary released.”

“And that really completes the MOLC work,” she added.

Bowser declined to answer questions about whether settlement talks are underway with the victims and their lawyers. “We’re not prepared to talk about a settlement,” she said, seemingly contradicting Natale, who had already told reporters that there have been “informal conversations with the parties.”

Taxpayers can expect to pay a hefty sum to compensate the victims, especially since it appears Falcicchio may have abused his power and authority almost since joining the Bowser administration, creating what surely seems to have been unpleasant working conditions — if not an outright hostile environment where he was the predatory, salivating wolf poised to attack. He resigned in mid-March after the first complainant secured legal representation and sought an investigation.

The District government could easily be home to a budding chapter of the “Me Too Movement,” given the reports’ findings and conversations I have had with various sources in the John A. Wilson Building, including at least one employee who has her own harassment story to tell.

“It started just months after I was hired,” the former official with the Bowser administration told me during a series of conversations that began earlier this year just after the initial sexual harassment allegation against Falcicchio became public. I had been told by two Wilson Building insiders that there were as many as 10 women who had experienced such discrimination. However, when approached by investigators, some denied they had been affected, while others declined to participate in the MOLC probe.

The former official said that Falcicchio back in 2015 invited her to his apartment to continue a discussion they had been having around a work-related topic. “It wasn’t late; it was around 7-ish.” 

When she arrived, “He became flirtatious and tried touching me. 

“It wasn’t intimidating but it wasn’t pleasant. When I finished the conversation, I left,” she said, adding that there was a second occasion when she found herself at his place for yet another meeting. 

“This time he was more forward. And I was thinking to myself, ‘This is not going to happen,’” she said. “He asked me to join him for dinner. I said no and quickly left.” 

She said she may have been more decisive in her handling of things because she was more experienced. Still, she wasn’t prepared for what came next. The initial instances of harassment were bad enough, but “the real scary part was part 2,” she said.

“It turned into a very unpleasant and hostile work environment,” she added. The former employee talked about assignments to certain events being changed, and senior staff beginning to treat her poorly.

After the first investigation into allegations of improper behavior by Falcicchio, which included remarkably similar claims that the MOLC determined to be outside its inquiry, Bowser sent a letter to DC Inspector General Daniel Lucas asking him whether a management review might help in determining whether current policies are working or need updating. 

Emergency legislation approved last month by the council and effective as of July 31 requires the OIG to conduct a similar audit of workplace practices and climate as well as to oversee a third-party investigation of the MOLC’s investigations to determine whether they were conducted properly and addressed all issues that had been raised by the victims of the abuse. Bowser had questioned the need to obtain an outside review as well as the potential cost of doing so, but she ended up signing the bill this week. That doesn’t surprise me given that not signing the bill might have led to a perception that she favored her former political confidant over the women who were harassed by him.

In a previous column, I argued that reviewing the investigations is an unnecessary duplication, especially since no one has yet accused the MOLC of mishandling the investigations. I continue to have that opinion. 

When asked early this week, an OIG spokesperson offered that with the enactment of the Sexual Harassment Investigation Review Emergency Act of 2023, “the OIG will release a request for proposal (RFP) for independent counsel in accordance with applicable statutory and regulatory contracting requirements.

“The OIG’s RFP will be publicly available, and all interested firms are encouraged to review and apply,” added the spokesperson via email. 

There was no answer to my question about whether Lucas agreed to conduct the review requested by the mayor or even responded to her letter. The office urged individuals “with information regarding this matter, or who wish to report other allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, or mismanagement in District programs and operations” to contact the agency’s hotline by telephone or email.

Council Chair Phil Mendelson said that the findings of the MOLC’s second “investigation reminds us of the continuing challenge of identifying and preventing sexual harassment in the workplace. 

“Because we knew this investigation was concluding, the Council authorized committees to, over the summer, examine what protections are in place to make sure harassment does not continue to happen in DC Government agencies,” Mendelson wrote in an email.

Thus far, however, there have been no oversight hearings. 

When I asked the communications director for Ward 1 Councilmember Brianne Nadeau, the author of the emergency legislation, whether she had a statement regarding the MOLC’s second investigation, David Connerty-Marin replied that “The Councilmember will not be available for comment.”

I sent a second email repeating my question about whether Nadeau intended to hold an oversight hearing concerning the Office of Human Rights and its handling of sexual harassment cases, including its seeming delay in setting up the system for tracking reports and resolutions. Connerty-Marin didn’t respond to that correspondence.

During her press briefing earlier this week, Bowser said she may make some changes to Mayor’s Order 2017-313 and possibly introduce new legislation. There already are more than enough laws on the books. Bowser’s order seems thorough and comprehensive. In fact, it appears the DC Council has adopted elements of it in creating its policy and process for addressing allegations of sexual harassment in the legislature. 

The cure is not more of the same. Rather, DC has to ramp up enforcement and oversight.

Over the past two months, I have sought to determine what role has been played by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) — the city’s chief legal officer and prosecutor. Has OAG looked at the issue of sexual harassment citywide? Has it handled any cases in other agencies? Has it been involved with settling any claims? How much of the public’s money has been spent to compensate for such transgressions?

Bowser may not want to talk about settlements, but Debra Katz and her colleagues — who represent both of the DC employees who brought the complaints reviewed by the MOLC — have surely been focused on money and making the city pay for the harm experienced by their clients from the time they first filed their complaint. After all, Katz and her firm have a reputation in this area; she represented some of Weinstein’s accusers, sat next to Christine Blasey Ford in her fight against Brett Kavanaugh, pushed through the case against Dan Synder and the Commanders, and — let’s not forget — stood with Charlotte Bennett as she made her accusations against then-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo. They are not inconsequential lawyers. Now, they are focused on DC.

After four requests sent via email to AG Brian Schwalb seeking information about what his office has or hasn’t done, I finally received a cryptic message from his spokesperson, indicating that within the past three years, since 2020, there have been “three settlements” related to sexual harassment complaints that occurred at the Metropolitan Police Department, the Department of Corrections and the Department of Public Works. Another six cases are outstanding. 

That apparently does not include those directly inside the OAG, which were disclosed earlier this year during a council performance oversight hearing. In a response to written questions, the OAG reported on fiscal year 2022: “Four individuals, two OAG employees and two non-employees, alleged that an OAG employee subjected them to discrimination on the basis of sex. OAG’s investigation found no discrimination in one case, and OAG closed its internal investigation. 

“OAG’s investigation is ongoing in three cases. Written reports from OAG’s outside EEO vendor are expected in those three cases in the near future,” the OAG said in the document found on the council’s website.

When I asked the OAG spokesperson about the status of those cases, I was asked, “can you provide more details on these? I don’t see any reference to them in the testimony.” I didn’t hear back after I provided the page number where the initial information could be found in the agency’s own oversight responses.

More legislation isn’t going to fix that kind of mismanagement and incompetence. Nor will it ultimately protect women like the former official who told me what happened after she rebuffed Falcicchio — who at the time was the mayor’s chief of staff but had not yet been appointed deputy mayor: She would be called into meetings where she was unable to bring her assistants with her. She was accused of being dishonest about her actions and conversations with other District government officials. And, at one point, recalls someone in the government telling her, “You better quit because they have someone who is going to make up a story about you harassing an employee.”

“That scared me,” the official told me. “After I heard that, I said, ‘I can’t be here any longer.’ I resigned.”

---

jonetta rose barras is an author and freelance journalist, covering national and local issues including politics, childhood trauma, public education, economic development and urban public policies. She can be reached at thebarrasreport@gmail.com.