Bowser’s Chief of Staff had free rein and was allowed to abuse it
He started as a go-fer, fetching pizzas and running errands for Adrian Fenty’s first mayoral campaign.
Through a mix of loyalty, hustle and something resembling political savvy, he rose to be the most powerful man in the District, the man everyone had to go through to get to Mayor Muriel Bowser, who had him running her office as Chief of Staff, forging D.C.’s future as her Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, and even controlling the D.C. Housing Authority as an ex-officio member of its Board of Commissioners.
Then one day in March and, poof, John Falcicchio was gone, felled by explicit allegations of sexual harassment – dick pics and all.
Since that day, city officials have done nothing to examine Falcicchio’s impact on workplace culture in the Mayor’s office, in D.C. government, or in the realm of politics and commerce, where he wielded unrestrained power, shed his old nickname, “Pizza Boy,” and became “Johnny Business.”
When revelations first surfaced, Bowser acted fast, dispatching the Mayor’s Office of Legal Counsel, or MOLC, to investigate a subordinate’s claims that Falcicchio had used his power as a means of sexual coercion – a review prescribed by a 2017 Mayor’s Order on sexual harassment policy that few in D.C. government had ever given much thought to.
Pursuant to that order, the Mayor’s lawyers interviewed dozens of potential victims and witnesses and looked at countless text messages and other communications between Falcicchio and his subordinate. A second subordinate later emerged and MOLC investigators conducted a second review following the same procedures.
Those reviews substantiated in bland summary terms the likelihood that Falcicchio had made unwanted sexual advances on his subordinates predicated on his seniority and control over their job status. (MOLC did not substantiate claims of hostility and retaliation in the workplace when the women rejected his alleged advances.)
Meanwhile, the Council tip-toed around the truth, too timid to call for an independent investigation, settling for a bill (four months after the first allegation) that required the D.C. Inspector General to hire an outside firm to do the dirty work – a task that, almost 10 months since the first complaint, has yet to begin.
The Council was not alone in its dereliction of duty. Neither the Office of the Inspector General nor the Office of the Attorney General took timely, decisive action to get to the bottom of the matter, either.
The upshot is that not a single official in the D.C. government has confronted the legacy of John Falcicchio, or attempted to determine the extent of his alleged abuse of office to get sex. Or to determine, were other officials privy to such misconduct, and if so, what did they do to address it?
D.C. is a gossipy town. It’s insular, incestuous and punitive. Blowing the whistle or speaking up about misconduct can be, professionally and politically speaking, akin to what happens to snitches in the street.
So if the two subordinates are telling the truth, are there other women who suffered the same mistreatment? Why have they not come forward?
The Mayor’s lawyers could not find, in close to three dozen interviews, anyone who had seen something, said something or endured something, despite allegations by Falcicchio’s accusers that there might be multiple other women with a story to tell.
Even if they wanted to say what happened to them, or anyone else, would they be eager to tell it to the person with a yellow legal pad and tape recorder whose client is the Mayor?
The stakes got higher one day in June, when an aspiring affordable housing developer told a City Paper reporter that Falcicchio had tried to coerce her into having sex with him as a prerequisite to doing business with the city.
When she refused, she claims Falcicchio had her blackballed.
What’s more, the woman first leveled the accusations publicly to community members and government officials a full year before Falcicchio would resign in the wake of the accusations against him.
Hundreds of pages of emails obtained by District Dig offer a lurid glimpse into that woman’s claims, and cast a harsh light on a city where the establishment protects the powerful by its passivity; a city that keeps secrets – even dirty secrets that are open ones, at least among insiders.
Multiple government officials have acknowledged that an independent investigation was the requisite course of action, and that it should have taken place out of the gate. So why didn’t anyone call for one until after MOLC had months to interview potential victims and witnesses?
Why did other city leaders settle for a process that had an inherent conflict, regardless of how well-conducted MOLC’s internal investigation was?
Maybe because of a collective impulse to look away for fear of becoming collateral damage; fear of not knowing where it might lead; or fear that rooting around in Falcicchio’s affairs might reflect poorly on the Mayor, if not the city, because she trusted him more than any other to represent the District of Columbia to the regional business community, the nation, and the world?
But perhaps the biggest concern of the Falcicchio saga is: If it was, as three women have alleged, an open secret he was using his position to get women to have sex with him, why did no one intervene sooner, when red flags and outright accusations surfaced?
***
D.C. is a so-called “pay-to-play” city. The third complainant’s allegations suggest that Falcicchio sought to extract his own, non-monetary price from women who were looking for the green light on a contract or venture, or even access to the Mayor. (The Dig is withholding her name in order to protect her privacy.)
A self-confident and persistent small-business owner, she had been pursuing housing opportunities for people with special needs in 2021 when Falcicchio allegedly pulled his pants down in his apartment during a purported business meeting, according to public statements she has made and emails reviewed by The Dig.
She has consistently said she refused to perform oral sex.
As she pursued business opportunities with the city she attempted to leverage relationships with other people in government, networked with well-connected developers, lobbyists and non-profit administrators, and applied for projects, contracts and equity impact grants.
But her emails where Falcicchio is concerned come off as aggressive and opportunistic, at the risk of diminishing her credibility and motives –or at least making people uneasy.
Eager to get her foot in the door, she even solicited help from the Mayor’s parents, whom she claimed to have a relationship with, and started dropping their names with city officials in an attempt to gain traction.
By spring 2022, she had concluded that Falcicchio was standing in her way, because he wanted her to do something she would not do.
On May 9 of that year, she emailed multiple recipients with the kind of message no one is comfortable receiving:
“My name is… and I teach young children (she/he/they/them/etc) to say NO to people like John Falcicchio from telling them they need to suck his dick to get contracts even if they are qualified,” she wrote, to Falcicchio; developers Buwa Binitie and Martin Weldon; executives with the Urban Land Institute; a senior Council staffer; and a Director in the Deputy Mayor’s office who reported to Falcicchio.
Two weeks later she sent another email to Falcicchio, Binitie, several members of a different nonprofit economic development organization, and an official with the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development who now works as a political appointee of the Mayor:
“Buwa tol John Falccicco brown girls have to give you Head to win contracts….so jersey John says….is that right!”
There is no indication that the recipients of these emails – including top officials in the Bowser administration – ever reported the allegations to anyone in city government with appropriate oversight authority.
Meanwhile, despite her 2021 encounter in his apartment, she continued to contact Falcicchio regarding housing opportunities for communities in need, and although she could be cryptic and mercurial, she was clear about her desire to advance her company and pursue a cordial relationship with him, if that’s what it took.
When she didn’t get a meeting she wanted, she’d refer to Mayor Bowser’s parents: “Wonderful! I have cc’d my good friend Deputy Mayor John who will help us close this deal,” she wrote to a D.C. lobbyist on January 4 of this year, in connection with a transportation contract. “The Mayors mom … opened the door for me to bring my projects to the forefront during the peak of the pandemic because she knows my passion and my character.”
This too was unsuccessful, but in early March a shakeup occurred, when Plaintiff lawyers Debra Katz and Kayla Morin filed the first of two claims with the Mayor’s office, alleging that Falcicchio had sexually harassed a subordinate with unwanted text messages in which he allegedly exposed himself.
The lawyers went public, calling his behavior “long standing.” Falcicchio resigned on March 16, and MOLC began an investigation.
Perhaps triggered by these developments, the complainant then expanded the audience for her allegations, sending emails to other members of the business community and the Bowser administration, and began re-asserting her claims from 2022.
In May, she wrote to a director in the Deputy Mayor’s office, whom she had first contacted a year earlier – and who reported to Falcicchio – regarding an interview request from a Washington Post reporter: “I’m not accepting this interview,” the subject line read, “…because [Falcicchio] told me way tooo many local and international secrets and it would affect too many peoples lives!”
A week later she wrote to Susana Castillo, the Mayor’s communications director and asked for a “big favor.” She had been on a “special housing project” for two years that she had presented to “multiple leaders within the DC government,” but she needed help getting the Mayor’s attention.
“The last step was to present it to the Mayor, but unfortunately John Falcicchio kept intercepting because I wouldn’t do the favors he asked of me,” she wrote.
In April, after a fruitless attempt to draw attention to a “dream team” with a proposal to create housing for veterans, she emailed Bowser’s Chief of Staff and one of the Mayor’s Ward liaisons.
She again dropped the Mayor’s mother’s name, insinuating that Mrs. Bowser knew something was amiss with Falcicchio.
The subject line of an April 21 email read, “John Falcicchio!” and began: “Stole my project and sent all my work to another developer friend of his choice because I would not submit to his requests. He sent me selfies and I forwarded it to Mrs [Bowser’s] cellphone via text! He kept telling me he was the mayor and his word supercedes the Mayors Mom!”
After the second subordinate of Falcicchio came forward late that month, the complainant reached out to the associate director of MOLC, who was designated as the Sexual Harassment Officer to investigate District government employee complaints:
“Mr Falcicchio asked me for oral sex during the pandemic and because I didn’t comply he kept interfering with my projects because he said I wasn’t loyal like the rest of them!” she wrote to the MOLC officer on May 2. “This has been going on since 2021!!
“He didn’t want me to do any business with the city because I wouldn’t comply! I have put so much time, effort, money into building my business and my brand and this has been once [sic] exhausting and demeaning journey.”
The officer and her boss, Vanessa Natale, Deputy Director of MOLC, interviewed the complainant on May 4, and on May 10, she provided them with her original missive from May 2022, claiming that the Deputy Mayor’s director who received it “laughed it off!!!”
The complainant is problematic as a purported victim. She distrusted the Mayor’s people, yet she continued to hound them. One day she told MOLC’s investigating officer she was going to the media because she regarded the officer’s role as being “to protect the mayor and cover up for John the predator.”
She also let the officer know that she had contacted the Mayor’s mother: “Check [her] cellphone… I sent her his selfies as proof.”
On May 11, the complainant contacted the MOLC officer again and indicated there were other victims of sexual harassment:
“Ladies (Af Am) are coming forward via a different law firm. They both have selfies of his penis and favors in return for contracts.”
In the same email, she said that when she sent a copy of one of Falcicchio’s selfies to the Deputy Mayor’s director, the director just laughed and said, “that’s my boss…that’s how he do!” (The Dig was unable to verify that a second law firm is looking into the claims of other women.)
And though her approach was not getting her anywhere, she kept referencing her relationship with the Mayor’s parents:
“I use to tell [the Bowsers] that Falccicco was the enemy within … and they would acknowledge it their own way. I sent the John selfie to [Mrs.] B cellphone as warning one day,” she wrote to the MOLC officer, also on May 11.
Then, in an email to Director of Real Estate Sarosh Olpadwala, and an assistant to Falcicchio, the complainant declared: “Everyone is obviously sick and tired of ‘the coverup’ you are trying to still perpetrate Sarosh…
“Give me my director’s initiative project that John Falcicchio hijacked and gave to one of y’all’s homies because I wouldn’t suck John’s Dick!”
MOLC’s engagement with the complainant ended on June 22. MOLC’s Vanessa Natale explains:
“Mayor’s Order 2017-313 authorized sexual harassment officers to investigate allegations of sexual harassment made by employees, contractors, or individuals engaged by the District to provide permanent or temporary employment services.
“When it became apparent the complainant was not an employee, contractor or otherwise engaged by the District, and that the bulk of her allegations involved claims of abuse of government power and unethical conduct, she was strongly encouraged to file a complaint with the D.C. Office of the Inspector General, the Board of Ethics and Government Accountability, or both.”
The complainant also was encouraged to file a complaint with the D.C. Office of Human Rights if she believed she had been denied equal opportunity to seek a contract with the District on the basis of sex, said Natale. MOLC does not know if the complainant went that route.
By the same token, there is no indication that anyone in the Bowser administration ever reported or looked into the allegations back in 2022, when the complainant first spoke up – or in 2023, after she revived her complaints. (Bowser’s office has said that the first time anyone ever heard of sexual harassment allegations against Falcicchio was when the first subordinate of Falcicchio came forward, on March 8.)
No one in the Bowser administration or the business community who received the developer’s emails responded to questions from The Dig. Neither the Mayor nor the Mayor’s parents responded to questions sent to the Mayor’s office.
The complainant agreed to meet with The Dig this week, then canceled a short time later. “I’m done with this Falcicchio business,” she said, before abruptly hanging up.
***
Government observers say allegations of sexual harassment call for an independent investigation that affords anonymity to the complainant, due process to the accused, and penalties for false testimony. Internal investigations that put employees down the chain of command on the spot can have a chilling effect on witnesses and would-be victims alike.
Veteran government lawyers also tell The Dig that the risk of legal liability to the city is particularly high when investigations are perceived to lack impartiality, independence, and credibility of findings.
The passage of time is crucial: Hearts and minds, memories and incentives can change; confidence in the integrity of the system can fade.
Yet to date, MOLC’s investigation has been the sole inquiry into the allegations against Falcicchio. No one else has been held accountable and no one can say how many lives and careers he affected, or how many transactions his behavior altered.
Nevertheless, MOLC released a redacted and summarized version of its findings on the subordinates’ complaints on June 26. The following day, Bowser wrote to D.C. Inspector General Daniel Lucas to inform him that the substantiated allegations against Falcicchio “more likely than not constituted sexual harassment.” (City Paper published its story on June 26 as well, airing the complainants allegations.)
“However, questions have been raised about the unsubstantiated claims the MOLC indicated were outside the scope of the sexual harassment investigation,” Bowser wrote, asking him to assess policies regarding “sexual or attraction-based” hiring and promotion practices, bullying of complainants, poor treatment by senior officials “orchestrated” by Falcicchio, and “retaliatory post-complaint treatment.”
In a press statement on June 29, attorneys Katz and Morin said the MOLC investigation violated the D.C. Human Rights Enhancement Amendment Act of 2022 by requiring a complainant to prove in some instances that a work environment was “severe or sufficiently pervasive.” (MOLC’s Deputy Director Natale insists her office conducted its investigation under the “current and correct” standard.)
They called on Bowser to consider an independent investigation by the D.C. Attorney General, rather than asking her own appointee, the Inspector General: “Mayor Bowser’s mishandling of the [MOLC] report, in addition to the substantiated findings against her former Chief of Staff and Deputy Mayor Falcicchio, have destroyed the public’s trust. A truly independent outside investigation would be the first step in the right direction.”
(According to news reports in August, the Attorney General’s office is investigating whether Falcicchio broke the law in connection with the allegations of sexual harassment.)
A spokesperson for Katz and Morin declined to discuss the complainant’s accusations, but told The Dig that, although they could not reach an agreement to represent her, the city had a clear duty to investigate her concerns and failed to do so.
Which, given the Council’s failure to act in a timely manner, has enabled the Bowser administration to avoid further scrutiny.
District Dig asked Council Chairman Phil Mendelson in March why he was not calling for an independent investigation from the outset.
“The Chairman has no authority regarding a member of the Mayor’s Executive staff, let alone legal accusations made against an individual in [the Executive Office of the Mayor],” said his spokesperson.
As chair of the committee with oversight of the Deputy Mayor’s office, Mendelson said, At-Large Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie would be the one to call a hearing; or, with oversight of the Mayor’s office (and D.C. Human Resources), At-Large Councilmember Anita Bonds.
Bonds was a non-starter. When allegations first arose, she issued calls to study data, convene working groups, and hold a hearing on reform. Nothing to do with accountability or the scope of alleged wrongdoing.
“Her concern was, and continues to be, the government-wide response to and handling of all complaints involving harassment,” her director of communications, Kevin Chavous said.
McDuffie is another story. His name appears in the complainant’s emails.
The first one is dated June 8, and is addressed to Katz and Morin and copied to McDuffie and others, including to Falcicchio’s redevelopment project director and Director of Real Estate Sarosh Olpadwala.
It features disturbing accusations against Falcicchio of racism, and again, she attributes the loss of a business opportunity to her sexual rejection of him.
“They all knew what was happening!!! The Mayor, her inner circle, Kenyan McD etc knew Falccicco was a sexual predator but they needed him to keep the green machine going…”
Derron Parks, McDuffie’s Chief of Staff, responded to her that “We have referred your previous accusations against Mr. Falcicchio regarding his actions toward you to the Mayor’s Office of Legal Counsel. We fully expect those allegations to be investigated along with other allegations.”
McDuffie’s office tells The Dig he had no knowledge of allegations against Falcicchio prior to the receipt of the June 8 email. (Parks said his reference to “previous accusations” refers to accusations the office received earlier that day; the emails obtained by The Dig do not include any other accusations directed to him on June 8.)
Eventually, on July 6, about four months after Falcicchio’s first subordinate came forward, Ward 1 Councilmember Brianne Nadeau introduced “emergency legislation” to require the Inspector General to hire independent counsel to evaluate MOLC’s methodology and conclusions and review any new complaints. The bill passed unanimously on July 11.
Why the four month delay? Cogent answers are hard to come by.
Nadeau’s office says she has been the champion of an independent investigation and a leader of policy reform. Waiting for MOLC to complete its report before taking action would alleviate funding hurdles, her spokesman said. “The goal was accountability, not scoring political points.”
That’s a different take from last week, however, when at a public hearing on the Sexual Harassment Investigation Integrity Act she disparaged the very process she allowed to play out:
“More than what was in the [MOLC] report or not in the report, what made the investigation unsatisfactory was the lack of independence of the office conducting the investigation. Even if the investigation was perfect in every aspect, how would we know and trust that? After all, [Falcicchio] was the Mayor’s associate and confidant.”
At the time of publication of this story, the Inspector General’s office still had not hired a firm to do an independent investigation. A spokesperson for Lucas said they expect to finalize a contract by the end of the year. The office had no further comment.
Former Ward 3 Councilmember Mary Cheh, a constitutional law professor at the George Washington University Law School, expressed disappointment with her former Council colleagues.
“This is ‘Good Government 101,’” Cheh tells The Dig, questioning why the Council afforded Bowser’s lawyers exclusive opportunity to interview Falcicchio’s subordinates and other potential victims and witnesses.
Having experienced different types of discrimination and harassment during her career, Cheh said that Council members should have put themselves in the shoes of those who cooperated with the internal investigation. “You don’t know if it’s gonna come back at you,” she said.
Someone on the Council should’ve “jumped on the policy right away,” Cheh said, and recognized that it is inadequate. “This has been an inordinately slow pace of reform,” she said. “It’s kind of outrageous actually.
“Someone should have taken charge of the whole thing. Anyone on the Council could have taken this up from the start, to put something in place that makes people confident and assured they can go somewhere for help.
“Where are the leaders when issues like this arise? If you wait it out, something else arises and you move along. And you haven’t put yourself at risk!
“But it’s their responsibility to respond. You are elected to office and you have to get involved. You are supposed to show some leadership and jump in. People know that if no one does anything, behavior like this can go on for years, and people get hurt.
“This was an opportunity to make things better, not something to be avoided.”
***
Editor’s Note: The story has been updated to reflect MOLC’s position on the standard it used to investigate claims against Falcicchio. And to report that Mayor Bowser’s office did not respond to requests for comment from The Dig.
