Connect with us

Local

LGBT witnesses back D.C. anti-bullying bills

ACLU says legislation could violate students’ civil liberties

Published

on

D.C. Mayor-elect Vincent Gray presided over a hearing this week on two bills to address bullying and harassment in public schools. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Nine witnesses representing the LGBT community expressed strong support for two bills aimed at prohibiting bullying in D.C. schools, public libraries and parks during a City Council hearing this week.

The LGBT witnesses, including two gay and one transgender student, gave examples of anti-LGBT bullying and harassment in the D.C. public school system. They joined other witnesses in noting that existing public school policies pertaining to bullying were not strong enough to adequately address the problem.

“The District of Columbia has been a pioneer on issues such as nondiscrimination in schools and yet is one of only a handful of jurisdictions in this country without an anti-bullying law,” said Alison Gill, a public policy associate with the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN).

Gill and other witnesses pointed to the 2009 D.C. Youth Risk Behavior Survey, a federally funded study that includes data on lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Among other things, the study found that 29 percent of LGB teens in the city’s middle schools and high schools have attempted suicide. The study did not collect data on transgender students.

Anti-gay bullying and harassment are believed to have played a large role in prompting the youth to consider suicide, Gill and other witnesses said.

D.C. Mayor-elect Vincent Gray presided over the hearing in his current role as City Council Chair and chair of the Council’s Committee of the Whole. He takes office as mayor on Jan. 2.

The Committee of the Whole and the Committee on Libraries, Parks and Recreation, which is chaired by Council member Harry Thomas (D-Ward 5), conducted a joint hearing on the two bills, the Bullying Prevention Act of 2010 and the Harassment and Intimidation Prevention Act of 2010.

Gray said after the hearing that the two bills would be combined following a markup hearing that he predicted would take place sometime next year.

“I don’t see the evidence of a comprehensive policy existing in the city on this,” Gray told reporters after the hearing, saying a combined version of the two bills would go a long way to address the problem of bullying.

The Bullying Prevention Act, which Gray and Council member Michael Brown (I-At-Large) introduced in April, calls for developing a “model policy prohibiting bullying, harassment and intimidation in the District of Columbia public schools.” It requires all public schools to adopt an anti-bullying and harassment policy at least as strong as the model policy defined in the bill.

The Harassment and Intimidation Prevention Act, which was introduced in October by Thomas, calls for developing similar policies banning bullying and harassment but expands the coverage to D.C. public charter schools, the city’s public libraries and parks and recreation centers, and to the University of the District of Columbia.

Thomas’s bill also covers bullying and harassment conducted through “electronic communication,” such as e-mail or social networking sites.

The bill defines harassment, intimidation or bullying as “any gesture or written, verbal or physical act, including electronic communication, that is reasonably perceived as being motivated either by any actual or perceived characteristic, such as race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, or a mental, physical or sensory handicap, or by any other distinguishing characteristic…”

It says an act of bullying, intimidation or harassment would be one that “a reasonable person should know, under the circumstances, will have the effect of harming a student or damaging the student’s property, or placing a student in reasonable fear of harm to his person or damage to his property.”

The definition further states that the act in question “has the effect of insulting or demeaning any student or group of students in such as way as to cause substantial disruption in, or substantial interference with, the orderly operation of a school, university, recreation facility, or library.”

Arthur Spitzer, legal director of the D.C. chapter of the ACLU, said the ACLU supports the concept of anti-bullying legislation but has concerns that the wording of the two proposed bills in D.C. could violate students’ civil liberties.

“What does it mean by harming a student?” he said of part of the definition in one of the bills. “Does that mean hurting a student’s feelings? If a student comes in and says I feel very harmed by the fact that so and so said I was a crappy athlete … That’s not bullying,” he said.

“So I think the language here needs to be tightened up.”

Spitzer told the Washington Post that it would be “perfectly legitimate” for a student to say he or she thinks homosexual conduct is “against the word of God.” Although such a comment might hurt the feelings of a gay student, that should not be defined as bullying but instead as “an opinion that every student has a right to express,” he told the Post.

GLSEN spokesperson Daryl Presgraves said GLSEN believes the language in the two D.C. bills would not violate students’ civil liberties. But he said GLSEN and others supporting the bills would be open to making changes if the ACLU demonstrates that the language would prevent students from expressing their opinions in a way that doesn’t cross the line of true bullying and harassment.

Trina Cole, a male to female transgender student who graduated in 2009 from D.C.’s Dunbar Senior High School, told the hearing she was victimized by harassment and intimidation that went far beyond hurting her feelings.

“At school, I was often both verbally and physically abused,” she said. “We need to have more support in our schools so that the bullying that I went through does not continue to happen every day.”

Cole testified on behalf of Metro Teen AIDS, a D.C.-based group that provides services to LGBT youth at risk for HIV.

Ginnie Cooper, chief librarian for the city’s public library system; Jesus Auguirre, director of the Department of Parks and Recreation; and Mark Farley, vice president of the Office of Human Resources for the University of the District of Columbia each expressed strong support for the two bills.

A spokesperson for the D.C. public schools did not appear before the hearing. Gray said the person expected to testify had a scheduling conflict and was expected to submit written testimony within the next week.

Gay activist and ANC commissioner-elect Bob Summersgill noted that the D.C. Public Schools currently use city-adopted regulations pertaining to student discipline as a basis for addressing bullying and harassment of students. A provision of the city’s Human Rights Act and a March 2000 directive by the then D.C. schools superintendent are also used as a patchwork of rules or laws to address bullying.

“The limitations in all of these laws and regulations are the implementation and enforcement,” Summersgill told the hearing. “If a school fails to make clear that bullying will not be tolerated, or if a teacher or staff fails to intervene when bullying occurs, or if a teacher or staff makes a derogatory comment or through inaction shows their distaste for some group, then they are tacitly giving approval of bullying and harassment,” he said.

Michael Musante, an official with Friends of Choice in Urban Schools (FOCUS), which advocates for D.C.’s public charter schools, said the group did not support the proposed legislation, saying charter schools were formed as semi-autonomous institutions independent from city control.

He said many charter schools already have anti-bullying polices and said charter schools prefer to address bullying through school disciplinary codes rather than “one-size-fits-all legislation.”

Gray and Council member Michael Brown, speaking after the hearing, said they favor including charter schools in the legislation before the Council.

“They have over 30,000 of our kids being educated with public money,” Gray said of the charter schools.

Others who testified in favor of the bills at the hearing included Renee Reopell, program associate for the D.C. LGBT community center; Peter Rosenstein, LGBT community activist; Rick Rosendall, vice president of the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance; Bill Briggs, executive director of Metro D.C. Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG); and Andrew Barnett, executive director of Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League (SMYAL).

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

Gay ANC commissioner sues D.C. over police ‘failure’ to pay reward money

Lawsuit says information led to conviction in murder, armed robbery cases

Published

on

D.C. Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner Tom Donohue (Washington Blade photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

Gay D.C. Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner Tom Donohue on Aug. 11 filed a lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court charging that D.C. police acted improperly and violated a local law by not paying him $30,000 in reward money for his role in helping police identify and arrest — and obtain the subsequent conviction — of one man charged with murder and another man charged with armed robbery in separate cases.

Although the lawsuit alleges improper action by D.C. police in carrying out the city’s Crime Solvers reward program, it names as defendants the District of Columbia and the Office of the Attorney General for D.C., which, among other things, defends the city against lawsuits.

Donohue, who is a member of the city’s ANC Rainbow Caucus consisting of LGBTQ elected ANC members, held a news conference outside the D.C. Superior Court building on Aug. 11 to talk about the lawsuit before entering the courthouse to officially file it.

The lawsuit states that Donohue “provided key video evidence that led to the arrest and conviction” of a man initially charged with first degree murder for allegedly running over a bicyclist with his car after the two got into an argument.

The lawsuit states that police had offered a $25,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the defendant in that case, but police “arbitrarily slashed the payment to $5,000 without prior notice or policy justification.”

Court records show that D.C. resident Eric Beasley was charged with first degree murder for killing David Farewell, 45, by hitting him with his car on Sept. 4, 2020, on the 2100 block of Young Street, S.E. The records show the evidence for the case was based in large part on video camera footage of the incident obtained by police. Donohoe has said he provided that video camera evidence.

The records show that during Beasley’s October 2023 trial a jury was unable to reach the required unanimous verdict, and the judge declared a mistrial.

According to the records, Beasley later agreed to an offer by prosecutors to plead guilty to a lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced in September 2024 to eight years in prison, a development that angered the victim’s family members who called it a “slap on the wrist,” according to a Fox 5 News report.

Donohue’s lawsuit says the second case in which he provided police with pivotal information involved a series of armed robberies known as the Fairlawn Serial Armed Robbery Spree that occurred in the Fairlawn neighborhood in Southeast D.C. in 2023 near where Donohue lives.   

The lawsuit says evidence consisting of video surveillance footage provided by Donohue to police enabled police to determine they initially wrongfully arrested an 18-year-old male for the robberies. “Using Plaintiff’s security video, MPD identified, arrested, and convicted the actual robber, David Crocker, who was sentenced to 18 years in federal prison,” the lawsuit states.

It says one of the detectives investigating the case recommended a $10,000 reward for Donohue’s help in the case based on the police Crime Solvers reward program. The detective’s recommendation was approved by then-Assistant D.C. Police Chief Kyle Ramey on Aug. 4, 2025, according to the lawsuit. 

But it adds, “Nevertheless, MPD improperly withheld payment.” 

When contacted by the Washington Blade for comment on Donohue’s lawsuit allegations, a D.C. police spokesperson said “MPD does not comment on pending or ongoing litigation.” 

Gabriel Shoglow-Rubenstein, who serves as press secretary for the D.C. Office of the Attorney General, which will be defending the city against the Donohue lawsuit, said he would look into obtaining a possible comment but said the office has a similar longstanding policy of not commenting on pending litigation.

“This action arises from the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department’s arbitrary, bad-faith, and legally unsupportable failure to honor its public reward promises and administrative obligations to Plaintiff,” the lawsuit states.

It says the MPD violated the city’s Freedom of Information Act or FOIA law by not responding to Donohue’s request for information and documents related to the decision not to pay him the full reward money.

“MPD’s reduction of Plaintiff’s homicide reward from $25,000 to $5,000, and its withholding of his approved $10,00 robbery reward, were undertaken completely devoid of written standards, making such decisions inherently arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of administrative discretion,” it says.

It calls for Donohue to be awarded $30,000 in compensatory damages consisting of the $20,000 “unpaid balance” for the homicide case reward and $10,000 for the robbery case reward. It also calls for reimbursement for “reasonable” litigation costs and attorney’s fees. Donohue told the Washington Blade that at this time he is representing himself without an attorney.

Donohue told the Blade that the refusal by D.C. police to pay him the full reward money also limited his plans to donate some of that money to the family of murder victim David Farewell to help pay for a burial stone. He said that due to the family’s limited resources Farewell is buried in an unmarked grave

Continue Reading

Delaware

New LGBTQ visitor center slated for Wilmington, Del.

The Collective to feature gift shop, queer museum, more

Published

on

Members of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance of Delaware (GLAD) at the Griffin Community Center in Wilmington, Del. (Photo from Collection of Delaware Queer History, courtesy of Ivo Dominguez Jr.)

During Pride month this year, the Delaware Sexuality and Gender Collective (DSGC) announced plans for The Collective, which will become Delaware’s first LGBTQIA+ visitor center and Wilmington’s first dedicated LGBTQIA+ space in nearly 40 years.

“We’ve been talking about the concept of a brick-and-mortar space for a long time,” said Noah Duckett, co-founder of DSGC.

A licensed clinical social worker, Duckett co-founded DSGC with his mother, Julissa Coriano, in 2018. DSGC is an independent nonprofit organization that provides vital clinical and educational support, social programming and direct-need support to the LGBTQIA+ community. 

Some of the programs DSGC offers include a free clothing closet for the trans community, meal support for people recovering from gender-affirming surgery, connections to pro bono legal services, a biannual Pride Market featuring over 100 LGBTQIA+-owned small businesses, and more. 

“Our vision for The Collective is a place where our community can come to learn, create, work and be inspired,” said Coriano.

The Collective will feature a visitor center and gift shop highlighting LGBTQIA+-owned businesses in Delaware.

“I think that this is something that’s going to benefit our community so much,” said Duckett.

Some of the LGBTQIA+-owned businesses that DSGC has already partnered with include Stress Induced Art Attack, Moonbeam Art Collaborative, Voce Coffee, Groovy Gemini Co., Scout Cafe, Macaron Social and Huxley and Hiro.

“Specifically in Wilmington, we haven’t had an LGBTQIA+-dedicated space in almost 40 years,” said Duckett.

The Griffin Community Center, which operated from 1986 to 1990, was Delaware’s first LGBTQ+ community center. The Griffin was founded by Ivo Dominguez Jr. and James C. Welch and provided a range of community services during the height of the HIV/AIDS crisis, including AIDS hotlines, organizational offices and meeting space. The center ultimately closed because of a lack of financial support.

Duckett said DSGC hopes The Collective will carry on The Griffin’s legacy while building a sustainable space for the LGBTQIA+ community.

“I think now more than ever, there’s more and more spaces closing their doors. More and more spaces are losing funding, seeing reduced funding and reduced access, especially LGBTQ+ organizations and communities,” said Duckett.

The Collective will also feature Delaware’s first LGBTQ+ history museum, curated by LGBTQ+ historian Carolanne Deal.

“We don’t have any permanent displays in the state about Delaware’s queer history, and we want people to be able to access that history any day of the year, not just during Pride Month,” said Deal.

With a master’s degree in art history for museum professionals, Deal has more than seven years of experience in curatorial work and hands-on collections care.

“It’s mainly going to be a graphic display with photographs, articles and accessible text that draws people in and creates a story for the community,” said Deal.

Although the museum will not initially have an object collection, Deal said she hopes to add physical archival pieces in the future.

“Delaware has been at the forefront of a lot of queer civil rights, and it’ll be really amazing to have that enshrined in a permanent display that’s not only up for Pride Month,” said Deal.

Duckett said DSGC is currently raising funds with the goal of beginning construction this summer and opening by the end of the year. 

Duckett told the Blade that fundraising efforts have reached just under $29,000 and that the organization is awaiting several major donations from community partner organizations.

However, he said DSGC continues to be denied many grants tied to federal or state funding because of restrictions on those funds being used for LGBTQ+-serving organizations.

“Private and corporate donations are absolutely vital,” said Duckett.

Anyone interested in supporting the construction and renovation of The Collective can donate online or contact [email protected] for more information.ose funds being used for LGBTQ-serving organizations.

“Private and corporate donations are absolutely vital,” said Duckett.

Anyone interested in supporting the construction of The Collective can donate online or contact [email protected] for more information.

Continue Reading

Rehoboth Beach

HISTORIC: Susan Stewart elected Rehoboth’s first out mayor

Thanks LGBTQ supporters and vows to protect city’s small town charm

Published

on

Susan Stewart easily won election as Rehoboth Beach’s new mayor on Saturday. (Photo courtesy of Susan Stewart)

Residents of Rehoboth Beach elected City Commissioner Susan Stewart with 61% of the vote on Aug. 8, making her the city’s first openly gay mayor. 

Stewart beat fellow commissioners Craig Their and Suzanne Goode in the race, as well as newcomer Jake Raak. 

The final mayoral vote results were:

  • Susan Stewart: 632
  • Craig Their: 203
  • Suzanne Goode: 177
  • William “Jake” Raak: 23

“I’m very grateful because the LGBTQ+ community not only voted for me, but also supported me,” said Stewart.

Stewart said that she is particularly grateful for the support she received on social media from members of the LGBTQ+ community. 

“I’ve had incredible support,” said Stewart. 

Stewart said that her campaign showed her just how much residents of Rehoboth are engaged and care about the city.

“They really want to see what’s best for the community,” said Stewart. 

Stewart spoke about the master planning initiative she has been working on as a commissioner, which she plans to continue as mayor. 

“We’ve undertaken rewriting the commercial zoning code, and that’s foundational to the next step of the initiative,” said Stewart. 

She said that she was proud of the results of charette week that was held last month where residents and business owners had the opportunity to speak with hired urban planners to give feedback for a zoning code update.

Stewart said that Rehoboth is at a tipping point as the city must find a way to balance the growth of the commercial district while improving the quality of life for residents. 

“I don’t believe there needs to be tension between the business community and the residential experience,” said Stewart. 

“I’m excited about a new master plan because we have a couple hotels coming, and we also have Clear Space Theatre looking for a new home, and we’re working with them,” said Stewart. “We want businesses to stay here.”

Stewart also said that she aims to embrace the concept of a ‘15-minute city,’ making the city much more accessible in terms of transportation in the downtown area for residents. 

“The goal is to protect the small town charm and natural beauty of Rehoboth,” said Stewart. “I want to keep the momentum going.” 

The Blade asked Stewart about any concerns she might have working with Commissioner Goode, whom she has criticized for sending inappropriate and offensive emails to city staff. Goode finished a distant third in the mayoral race and her husband fell short in his bid for a Commissioner’s seat. In that race, Jeffrey Goode received 239 votes; Patrick Gossett, who’s gay, received 813 votes and Mark Saunders 852. Saunders and Gossett will be sworn in next month.

“I’m really eager to move past this issue with Commissioner Goode,” said Stewart. 

She said that she’s heard ‘loud and clear’ from the city that they want to move past this situation as best as they can while Goode remains in her seat as commissioner. 

“There are no mechanisms for us to remove a sitting commissioner. Our laws don’t allow it,” said Stewart. 

Stewart clarified that she has always focused on Goode’s behavior toward city staff. 

“One thing I feel really passionate about is that the city employees have to know that they are heard. They are real people with real jobs, real professional reputations, and they’ve been harmed,” said Stewart. 

The Blade also asked if Stewart had made a final decision on whom she plans to nominate to fill her Commissioner seat. 

“I’m considering who to appoint and I have not made any final decisions,” said Stewart. 

She noted that, as mayor, she only has the power to nominate a candidate and that the board of commissioners will have the final vote on whom to appoint to the board. 

Stewart shared that she has received interest from a number of people and finds that to be a good sign. 

“I think that’s a great sign because people want to serve. I’m eager to have someone in that seat who’s smart and has the best interests of the city,” said Stewart. 

Stewart will be sworn in during the Board of Commissioners meeting on Sept. 18.

Continue Reading

Popular