Jack Evans asked for a chance to tell his colleagues his side of the story—but when he got that chance at a D.C. Council meeting on Tuesday, the Ward 2 Councilmember repeatedly declined to answer their questions.

Evans’ message was clear: the other councilmembers didn’t have all the facts at hand, and should wait before stripping him of the Finance Committee chairmanship that he’s held for the past two decades, amid dogged accusations that he used his public office for private gain. A vote is scheduled for next week.

But his colleagues did not appear persuaded, and many of them expressed frustration that Evans wasn’t being more forthcoming.

“It’s clear that an increasing number of councilmembers distrust the integrity of a broader, increasing number of votes, or issues, or actions that the councilmember has taken,” said D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson after the meeting. Mendelson did not ask any questions of Evans during the administrative meeting. “I did not see answers [from Evans] that calmed the members.”

Evans would only answer questions pertaining to a 20-page report that outlined a slew of alleged ethical violations during his time as the chairman of the Metro Board of Directors. The report was written by attorneys from the law firm Schulte Roth & Zabel, which was hired to investigate Evans by the Metro board’s ethics committee. It detailed “a pattern of conduct in which Evans attempted to and did help his friends and clients and served their interests, rather than the interests of WMATA.”

Evans said the report was sloppy, and wanted to clear up “WMATA issues that have arisen to the point where you are considering taking away my Finance Committee chairmanship.”

Other councilmembers weren’t so convinced that there was such a clear dividing line between questions about the Metro report and those pertaining to his 28 years serving on the D.C. Council.

Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen was among those maintaining that Evans’ council work was fair game, because the Metro memo was “replete with co-mingling about Metro duties and council duties.”

Still, Evans repeatedly said D.C. Council matters were “beyond what I wanted to talk about.” He framed the issue of his chairmanship as one of due process, in which legislators should wait until the end of the ongoing federal inquiry into Evans’ business dealings to determine whether he should remain in charge of the Finance Committee. As part of that inquiry, federal agents raided Evans’ Georgetown home on June 21 and his colleagues on the D.C. Council received subpoenas in March.

Allen disagreed with Evans’ framing. “As elected officials, we don’t have a right to committees,” he said. “We don’t have a right to chair committees.” He said he saw removing Evans as chairman as a way to safeguard the institution of the D.C. Council.

At-large Councilmember David Grosso also believed that action was necessary immediately, in the most fiery exchange of the morning. “Slowing down now is completely unacceptable,” Grosso said, adding that he wanted to see Evans removed from all committees. “We should police ourselves.”

A group of councilmembers—At-large Councilmember Robert White, Ward 1’s Brianne Nadeau, Ward 4’s Brandon Todd, and Ward 5’s Kenyan McDuffie—arrived at the start of the meeting but didn’t stick around for the proceedings.

McDuffie stood outside the room after it ended to tell reporters that he left after learning Evans would not be speaking under oath.

“We gave him an opportunity to make a statement back in March,” McDuffie said. “Since that time, he said things about the WMATA ethics investigation that have proven to be untruthful. And therefore, the only thing I want to hear from him are statements made under oath and subject to the penalty of perjury.”

Mendelson said that the meeting wasn’t intended to be a formal hearing, and “therefore it would have been inappropriate to swear him in.”

The administrative meeting took place in a small room on the top floor of the Wilson Building. While media and D.C. Council staffers were permitted inside, others were instructed to head to an overflow room.

Denise Krepp, an advisory neighborhood commissioner in Ward 6 who has sent a slew of letters to Mendelson, Metro, and others about the Evans imbroglio, was denied entry before the meeting began. “I was told this meeting was open to the public,” she said. She hand-delivered a letter from two dozen ANC commissioners requesting more information about the the D.C. Council’s investigation into Evans.

Mendelson provided more information about the plans for that investigation at the end of the meeting. He said that the D.C. Council would hire an independent law firm to investigate Evans, and any determination about an ad hoc committee made up of councilmembers would come later.

His intent is for the investigation to take place over the summer, when the council is on recess, and have a report waiting for legislators when they return. Mendelson said he is working with the general counsel to find a law firm that will investigate Evans.

Evans did not speak to media after the meeting. He walked down the large marble stairs, and a man collecting signatures for an ongoing effort to recall Evans from office asked him to sign the petition.

Previously:
Jack Evans Says It’s ‘Premature’ To Remove Him As Finance Committee Chairman
The D.C. Council Will Investigate Jack Evans. Here’s Where Members Stand On Their Scandal-Plagued Colleague
Jack Evans Resigns From Metro Board After Doozy Of A Report About His Ethics Violations
Jack Evans Admits He Violated The Metro Board Ethics Code (After First Denying It)
Council Votes To Strip Jack Evans Of Some Finance Committee Responsibilities In Wake Of Ethics Scandal
Reprimand? Investigate? Sanction? Here’s Where Local Officials Stand On Jack Evans’ Ethics Scandal
D.C. Councilmembers Receive Subpoenas For Their Conversations With Jack Evans
Notes On A Scandal: WTF Is Going On With Ward 2’s Jack Evans?

This story has been updated with additional information throughout.