Local
Graham faces reprimand by D.C. Council
Gay Council member files lawsuit challenging ethics board

D.C. Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) (Washington Blade photo by Jeff Surprenant)
D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large) introduced a resolution on Thursday calling for the Council to reprimand gay Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) on grounds that he violated a Council ethics rule in 2008 over dealings with a Metro and lottery contract.
Mendelson scheduled a special Council meeting for Monday, Feb. 25, to discuss and vote on his nine-page reprimand resolution.
In a separate action, Mendelson said he plans to remove from Graham’s Council committee assignment responsibilities for overseeing the city’s alcoholic beverage regulatory agencies.
Meanwhile, Graham’s attorneys on Thursday morning filed a lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court challenging the legal authority of the D.C. Board of Ethics and Government Accountability to issue a finding last month alleging that Graham violated the city’s code of conduct over the contract matter.
Mendelson’s resolution seeking a Council reprimand is based, in part, on the findings of the ethics board that Graham breached city ethics rules.
In addition to the lawsuit, Graham’s attorneys filed separate motions asking the court to issue a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction ordering the ethics board to withdraw its ruling on Graham until its legality is determined by the court.
Mendelson’s resolution cites findings by three separate entities, including the Board of Ethics and Government Responsibility, that Graham breached the city’s code of conduct by allegedly attempting to pressure a businessman into withdrawing a bid for a Metro development contract in exchange for Graham’s support for the businessman receiving a D.C. lottery contract.
Graham has denied he interfered with the contract approval process. He has said he made it clear he favored another company for the Metro contract but said his preference was based on sound evidence the company he favored was better qualified to carry out the contract.
“Councilmember Graham’s actions constitute a clear violation of Council Rule 202(a), which requires that, as a Councilmember, he ‘maintain a high level of ethical conduct’ and ‘refrain from taking, ordering, or participating in any official action that would adversely affect the confidence of the public on the integrity of the District government,” Mendelson’s proposed resolution says.
“To maintain the confidence of the public in the integrity of the legislative branch of government, the Council expresses disapproval of the conduct of Councilmember Jim Graham as detailed in this resolution, and hereby reprimands Councilmember Jim Graham for affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the integrity of government in violation of D.C. Official Code…”
Graham’s office released a statement from one of his attorneys saying the lawsuit filed on Thursday asserts that the ethics board issued its ruling against Graham without legal authority.
The board “had no basis to issue the findings and pronounce judgment against our client without granting him a chance to be heard, allowing him to review and challenge the evidence to which we were denied access, and conducting a full adversary hearing,” attorney Caroline Mehta said in the statement.
“The Board violated the law and its own rules,” she said. “This is not the ethics process that the Council sought to put into place, nor is it one whose decisions are worthy of respect or weight.”
She added, “Today we filed for relief and are confident that the court will agree that the Board acted lawlessly and denied Councilmember Graham basic fairness and due process.”
In its 38-year history, the D.C. Council has handed down a reprimand to just one Council member – Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), the city’s former mayor. In 2010, an internal Council investigation found that Barry improperly awarded contracts from his office based on favoritism rather than merit.
Council observers said the court doesn’t have authority to prevent the Council from reprimanding Graham, regardless of how it rules on whether the ethics board acted legally in its ruling against Graham.
District of Columbia
Judge rescinds stay-away order in Capital Pride anti-stalking case
Evidence hearing to determine if order should be reinstated against Darren Pasha
A D.C. Superior Court judge on April 17 rescinded an anti-stalking order he approved in February at the request of Capital Pride Alliance against local LGBTQ activist Darren Pasha.
In a ruling at a court status hearing, Judge Robert D. Okum agreed with defendant Darren Pasha’s stated concern that the initial order was too broad and did not specify who specifically he must stay at least 100 feet away from, as called for in the order.
Okum ruled on April 17 that the initial order, which he noted was oral rather than written, would be suspended until an evidentiary hearing takes place in which Capital Pride will need to present evidence justifying the need for such an order.
“I’m fine with scheduling a hearing at which the plaintiff can present evidence, and the defendant can present evidence,” Okum said. “But I’m not fine with just continuing this oral TRO [Temporary Restraining Order] that Mr. Pasha really doesn’t even have notice of. That seems unfair,” he said.
After asking both Pasha and Capital Pride Alliance Attorney Nick Harrison when they would be available for the evidence hearing, Okum set the date for April 27 at 11 a.m. in Superior Court.
The case began when Capital Pride Alliance, the D.C.-based LGBTQ group that organizes the city’s annual Pride events, filed a Civil Complaint on Oct. 27, 2025, against Pasha, accusing him of engaging in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk Capital Pride’s staff, board members, and volunteers.
The complaint was accompanied by a separate motion seeking a restraining order, preliminary injunction, and anti-stalking order prohibiting Pasha from “any further contact, harassment, intimidation, or interference with the Plaintiff, its staff, board members, volunteers, and affiliates.”
In his initial ruling in February, Okum issued an order requiring Pasha to stay at least 100 feet away from Capital Pride staff, board members, and volunteers until the April 17 status hearing. He reduced the stay-away distance from the 200 yards requested by Capital Pride.
Pasha, who has so far represented himself in court without an attorney, has argued in multiple court filings and motions that the Capital Pride stalking allegations are untrue. In his initial 16-page response to the complaint, Pasha said it appears to be a form of retaliation against him for a dispute he has had with Capital Pride and its former board president, Ashley Smith, who has since resigned from the board.
“It is evident that the document is replete with false, misleading, and unsubstantiated assertions,” Pasha’s court response states.
At the April 17 hearing, Okum also ruled that, as standard procedure for civil complaints such as this one, he has ordered both parties to enter into court-supervised mediation to attempt to reach a settlement rather than go to trial.
In an earlier ruling Okum denied Pasha’s request for a jury trial, stating that civil cases such as this must undergo a trial with the judge determining the verdict under existing civil court statutes.
The April 17 court hearing was held in a courtroom at the courthouse, but as allowed under current court rules, Capital Pride attorney Harrison and Capital Pride official June Crenshaw participated virtually through a video connection. Pasha attended the hearing in the courtroom.
“This matter is proceeding through the court in the normal course,” Capital Pride released in a statement. “We look forward to presenting the relevant evidence at the scheduled hearing. Capital Pride Alliance remains committed to maintaining a safe and respectful environment for our staff, volunteers, and community, and to addressing concerns through appropriate channels.”
“This is clearly a case of retaliation,” Pasha told the Blade after the hearing. “Today the judge removed the stay-away order and asked Capital Pride Alliance to present enough evidence and examples to see if a stay-away order should be granted,” he said. “Because Pride is coming up in June, we need to see where this is going.”
District of Columbia
Gay D.C. police lieutenant arrested on child porn charges
Matthew Mahl once served as head of LGBT Liaison Unit
D.C. police announced on April 14 that they have placed one of their lieutenants, Matthew Mahl, on administrative leave and revoked his police powers after receiving information that he was arrested in Maryland one day earlier.
Although the initial D.C. police announcement doesn’t disclose the reason for the arrest it refers to a statement by the Harford County, Md. Sheriff’s Office that discloses Mahl has been charged with sexual solicitation of a minor and child porn solicitation.
“On Tuesday, the Harford County Sheriff’s Office contacted MPD’s Internal Affairs Division shortly after arresting Lieutenant Matthew Mahl,” the D.C. police statement says.
“The allegations in this case are extremely disturbing, and in direct contrast to the values of the Metropolitan Police Department,” the statement continues. “MPD’s Internal Affairs Division will investigate violations of MPD policy once the criminal investigation concludes,” it says.
“MPD is not involved in the criminal investigation and was not aware of the investigation until yesterday,” the statement adds.
Mahl served as acting supervisor of the MPD’s then Gay & Lesbian Liaison Unit in 2013 when he held the rank of sergeant. D.C. police officials placed him on administrative leave and suspended his police powers that same year while investigating an undisclosed allegation.
A source familiar with the investigation said Mahl was cleared of any wrongdoing a short time later and resumed his police duties. Around the time he was promoted to lieutenant several years later Mahl took on the role as chairman of the D.C. Police Union, becoming the first known openly gay officer to hold that position.
NBC 4 reports that Mahl, 47, has served on the police force for 23 years and most recently was assigned to the department’s Special Operations Division.
Records related to Mahl’s arrest filed in Harford County District Court, show Sheriff’s Department investigators state in charging documents that he allegedly committed the offenses of Sexual Solicitation of a Minor and Child Porn Solicitation on Monday, April 13, one day before he was arrested on April 14.
The court records show he was held without bond during his first appearance in court on April 14. A decision on whether he would be released while awaiting trial or continue to be held without bond was scheduled to be determined during an April 15 bond hearing. The outcome of that hearing could not be immediately determined.
Maryland
Evan Glass is leaning on his record. Is that enough for Montgomery County’s top job?
Gay county executive candidate pushing for equitable pay, safer streets, and cleaner environment
By TALIA RICHMAN | During a meet-and-greet at Poolesville Memorial United Methodist Church, Evan Glass got his loudest applause of the night with a plan he acknowledged was decidedly unsexy.
“Day one, I’ll hire a director of permitting services,” the county executive candidate said.
Doing so, he added, is a step toward easing the regulatory burdens that can stifle small businesses in Montgomery County.
The only problem? At least one of his fiercest competitors is making a similar pledge.
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
-
Brazil5 days agoTrailblazing trans Brazilian lawmaker refuses to set foot in Trump’s America
-
District of Columbia4 days agoGay D.C. police lieutenant arrested on child porn charges
-
District of Columbia4 days agoD.C. bar, LGBTQ+ Community Center to mark Lesbian Visibility Week
-
National4 days agoDemonstrators disrupt OMB director hearing over PEPFAR
