Local
Ethics board says Graham violated ‘code of conduct’
But gay Council member won’t face sanctions
An ethics investigation against gay D.C. Council member Jim Graham was dismissed on Thursday. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
The recently created D.C. Board of Ethics and Government Accountability says it found “sufficient evidence” that gay D.C. Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) violated the city’s code of conduct for a public official.
But in a 27-page opinion issued on Thursday, the three-member board declared that the improper actions it claims Graham took in 2008 to interfere with the selection of competing companies for lucrative Metro and D.C. Lottery contracts occurred before the city’s new ethics law went into effect last year.
Based on the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition on holding someone responsible for an action that wasn’t prohibited by law at the time the person committed the action, the board said it decided not to open a formal investigation into Graham’s alleged ethics breach and dismissed the case.
“[W]e find there to be sufficient evidence to conclude that Council member Graham committed one or more violations of the District of Columbia Code of Conduct, justifying a formal investigation and the issuance of Notice of Violation,” the board said in its opinion.
“However, Constitutional constraints concerning ex post facto application of the sanctions available to the board effectively prevent the board from imposing any sanction on Council member Graham for his misconduct,” the ruling states.
“Without the power to sanction Council member Graham, the Board concludes that there is little benefit to advancing the preliminary investigation to a formal investigation and issuing a notice of violation,” the board said. “Accordingly, this matter is DISMISSED,” it said.
Graham’s attorney, William W. Taylor III, said in a statement that he and Graham expected the Ethics Board to end its proceedings.
“It is disappointing and unfair, however, for the Board to purport to make “findings” which Mr. Graham has no opportunity to contest and had no notice would be at issue in this matter,” Taylor said.
The Board’s initial proceeding in the Graham case was to determine whether the board should conduct a “formal” investigation, not to determine whether Graham had committed ethical violations, Taylor said.
“Therefore, under its own rules, the Board was not permitted or required to make ‘findings’ about Council member Graham’s conduct,” he said.
The Board of Ethics, which is chaired by gay former D.C. Attorney General Robert Spagnoletti, began its probe into an alleged ethics breach by Graham after the completion of an earlier investigation conducted by a law firm on behalf of the Metro transit board.
That investigation found that Graham violated the Metro board’s ethics rules in his alleged dealings with a Metro contract. Graham was a member of the Metro board at the time the alleged improprieties took place in 2008.
The Metro board probe, and the Board of Ethics findings released this week, each claimed that Graham offered to support a bid for a lottery contract from a D.C. businessman if the businessman agreed to withdraw a separate bid for a contract from Metro. The Metro contract was for a major real estate development project on land owned by Metro.
The Ethics Board findings, among other things, allege that Graham wanted the Metro contract to go to another company whose two principal owners made campaign contributions to Graham in the past. Graham has vigorously denied his motive for favoring the bid from the opposing businessmen was based on their campaign contributions to him. He said he favored the opposing company because it was better qualified to carry out the development project.
In its ruling, the Ethics board said Graham violated three provisions in the Code of Conduct – he lost his independence and “impartiality,” he gave preferential treatment, and he damaged public confidence in government.
The Ethics Board’s findings prompted the Washington Post to publish an editorial Thursday night calling for Graham to resign from the Council.
“I am not resigning,” Graham said in a statement released on Friday.
“There has been no allegations or suggestion that a crime has been committed, or that there is an illegal financial request or laws that have been broken,” he said. “I categorically deny any connection between any campaign donation and my actions on these matters.”
Graham added, “I am now in discussions with my lawyer as to next legal steps.”
District of Columbia
Mayor Bowser signs bill requiring insurers to cover PrEP
‘This is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS’
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser on March 20 signed a bill approved by the D.C. Council that requires health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.
Like all legislation approved by the Council and signed by the mayor, the bill, called the PrEP D.C. Amendment Act, was sent to Capitol Hill for a required 30-day congressional review period before it takes effect as D.C. law.
Gay D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5) last year introduced the bill.
Insurance coverage for PrEP drugs has been provided through coverage standards included in the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. But AIDS advocacy organizations have called on states and D.C. to pass their own legislation requiring insurance coverage of PrEP as a safeguard in case federal policies are weakened or removed by the Trump administration, which has already reduced federal funding for HIV/AIDS-related programs.
Like legislation passed by other states, the PrEP D.C. Amendment Act requires insurers to cover all PrEP drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Studies have shown that PrEP drugs, which can be taken as pills or by injection just twice a year, are highly effective in preventing HIV infection.
“I think this is a win for our community,” Parker said after the D.C. Council voted unanimously to approve the bill on its first vote on the measure in February. “And this is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS.”
District of Columbia
Blade editor to be inducted into D.C. Society of Professional Journalists Hall of Fame
Kevin Naff marks 24 years with publication this year
Longtime Washington Blade Editor Kevin Naff will be inducted into D.C.’s Society of Professional Journalists Hall of Fame in June, the group announced this week.
Hall of Fame honorees are chosen by the Society of Professional Journalists’ Washington, D.C., Pro Chapter. Naff and two other inductees — Seth Borenstein, a Washington-based national science writer for the AP and Cheryl W. Thompson, an award-winning correspondent for National Public Radio — will be celebrated at the chapter’s Dateline Awards dinner on Tuesday, June 9, at the National Press Club. The dinner’s emcee will be Kojo Nnamdi, host of WAMU radio’s weekly “Politics Hour.”
“I am tremendously honored by this recognition,” Naff said. “I have spent a lifetime in the D.C. area learning from so many talented journalists and am humbled to be considered in their company. Thank you to SPJ and to all the LGBTQ pioneers who came before me who made this possible.”
Naff joined the Blade in 2002 after years in print and digital journalism. He worked as a financial reporter for Reuters in New York before moving to Baltimore in 1996 to launch the Baltimore Sun’s website. He spent four years at the Sun before leaving for an internet startup and later joining the mobile data group at Verizon Wireless working on the first generation of mobile apps.
He then moved to the Blade and has served as the publication’s longest-tenured editor. In 2023, Naff published his first book, “How We Won the War for LGBTQ Equality — And How Our Enemies Could Take It All Away.”
Previous Hall of Fame inductees include luminaries in journalism like Wolf Blitzer, Benjamin Bradlee, Bob Woodward, Andrea Mitchell, and Edgar Allen Poe. The Blade’s senior news reporter Lou Chibbaro Jr. was inducted in 2015.
Maryland
Supreme Court ruling against conversion therapy bans could affect Md. law
Then-Gov. Larry Hogan signed statute in 2018
By PAMELA WOOD, JOHN-JOHN WILLIAMS IV, and MADELEINE O’NEILL | The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled against a law banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ kids in Colorado, a ruling that also could apply to Maryland’s ban on the discredited practice.
An 8-1 high court majority sided with a Christian counselor who argues the law banning talk therapy violates the First Amendment. The justices agreed that the law raises free speech concerns and sent it back to a lower court to decide whether it meets a legal standard that few laws pass.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the court’s majority, said the law “censors speech based on viewpoint.” The First Amendment, he wrote, “stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country.”
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Mayor Bowser signs bill requiring insurers to cover PrEP
JD Vance to travel to Hungary next week
Pam Bondi ousted as attorney general
VIDEO: Gay journalist detained for booing Trumps at ‘Chicago’ opening night
Idaho Gov. signs harshest anti-trans bathroom bill in the country
‘Out for McDuffie’ event held at D.C. gay bar
‘Jonah’ an undeniably compelling but unusual memory play
The Oscar-losing performance that’s too good to miss
Thousands attend ‘No Kings’ protests in D.C.
