Investigators delivered a report delving more deeply into John Falcicchio’s sexual harassment of city employees to the Council late Friday. But, for now, the public isn’t allowed to see it.

After several days’ worth of rumors flying about the report’s imminent release, Ward 1 Councilmember Brianne Nadeau delivered the disappointing news in a 5 p.m. press release: The Council “received a lengthy, unredacted report, which I will be reviewing thoroughly over the weekend” and “consulting with legal advisors about which aspects of the report might be released to the public.” Two Wilson Building sources tell Loose Lips that the report, which was compiled by the law firm Arnold and Porter under the supervision of the Office of the Inspector General, was delivered only as a hard copy to Council offices to ensure it would not be widely shared.

“While this took longer than any of us had originally expected, I am pleased that we have a report that I hope will allow us to understand more about the working climate that allowed the alleged incidents to occur, the investigative process, and what changes must be made,” Nadeau, who led the charge to demand the independent review in the first place, wrote in a statement. 

That means D.C. residents, who shelled out about $750,000 to fund the report, will for now remain in the dark about the full accounting of the scandal that drove Falcicchio (Mayor Muriel Bowser’s former chief of staff, deputy mayor for planning and economic development, and longtime political confidant) from office last March. 

However, City Paper contributor Tom Sherwood provided some hint of what to expect during his appearance on The Politics Hour Friday, noting he’s heard rumblings that the report will suggest Falcicchio could be referred for criminal charges related to his behavior. (A source told LL last summer that both federal and local law enforcement agencies were investigating Falcicchio for potential charges connected to the harassment scandal, but so far none have been filed.) Sherwood also said that he’d heard some suggestion that the report will describe other women allegedly harassed by Falcicchio beyond the two government employees who accused him of making unwelcome advances.

The Bowser administration recently acknowledged that it reached legal settlements with those two women Thursday. Her office told reporters that “confidentiality provisions” in the city’s settlement with the women prevent them from discussing the details of the arrangement. 

“We had a very tough situation in the government,” Bowser said at an event Friday morning. “We had two of our employees that were harmed as a result, we were expeditious and fair in our investigation and the matter is settled.”

Bowser would not comment on the investigative report into Falcicchio, however, saying she had not yet seen it. The legislation that initiated the investigation stipulates that her office should also receive a copy of the report at the same time as the Council.

The independent review, ordered by the Council last July, was designed to examine questions surrounding Falcicchio that the Mayor’s Office of Legal Counsel did not touch when it reviewed allegations from the first two women to come forward. The MOLC found that Falcicchio likely harassed them, but did not investigate whether he punished or rewarded his employees based on whether they accepted his sexual advances. Similarly, the MOLC didn’t look into claims that Falcicchio demanded sex from a woman seeking government contracts in exchange for advancing her projects. Nor did it have the power to compel other government employees to cooperate with the investigation.

The legislation authorizing this most recent report delivered to the Council is silent on how it will eventually be made public, if at all, leaving the decision with the mayor and Council. Nadeau’s spokesperson says there’s no timetable for when any details could be released. 

Nadeau said in her statement that she pushed for this independent probe so that “District government employees, residents, and the Council could trust that the review was thorough and impartial.” LL might suggest that the best way to build some of that trust is to release its results to the public as quickly as possible.