Photo by ssteege1.

When members of the D.C. Council’s Committee on Government Operations gather next week to discuss a comprehensive ethics bill written by Councilmember Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4), they’ll debate halving the amount that councilmembers can raise for their Constituent Services Funds, the pool of money they each have available to help constituents in times of trouble.

The problem? It’s not how much they can raise for the funds that seems to be the issue, but rather what they’re spending it on — namely, not constituents.

According to an analysis of Constituent Services Funds by progressive group D.C. for Democracy, only 12 percent of the $48,271 spent by councilmembers out of the funds in 2010 actually went to immediate constituent needs like rental assistance, electric bill payments and funeral expenses.

The numbers varied widely amongst councilmembers, but none of them exceeded the 50 percent mark. Councilmember Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3) sat at the bottom of the rankings, with only one percent of her spending put towards constituents. She was followed by Councilmember Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7), at two percent. Councilmember Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6) led the field with 32 percent, followed by then-Council Chair Vince Gray (27 percent) and Councilmembers Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) and Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), both at 25 percent.

The group’s analysis found that the majority of the funds went to pay to assist or support community organizations and events or basic office expenditures. It found:

Nine councilmembers spent far more from their constituent services funds on this category of expenditures that they spent on either immediate constituent needs or on community events or organizations, with their expenditures for this category ranging from 40% to 87% of their total CSF expenditures.

Citing concerns of how money is raised and who contributes to the funds, the group proposes getting rid of them all together and instead allowing an office within the executive handle the tasks. As for Bowser’s proposal that the definitions of what the funds can be used for be tightened up and the fundraising be cut from $80,000 a year to $40,000, the group isn’t convinced.

“Reducing the limits on contributions and expenditures from $80,000 to $40,000, as Councilmember Muriel Bowser proposes, yet not really narrowing the definition of what CSFs can be spent for, does not, in our view, address the underlying question of why the CSFs should be continued,” it concludes.

The usefulness of Constituent Services Funds has long been debated, but the issue gained traction this year when the Post reported that Councilmember Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) had spent more out of his fund on sports tickets than on helping charitable organizations. Alexander’s use of her fund was investigated by the D.C. Office of Campaign Finance earlier this year; she was later fined $4,000 for misuse of funds.

During a hearing in late October, various activists and councilmembers defended the use of the funds, saying that they provided resources for emergency situations. If anything, they noted, the rules on what counts as a legitimate expenditure should be tightened up, but the funds should remain. Critics maintained that the funds offered an additional way for the well-heeled to influence councilmembers through contributions.