Connect with us

Local

D.C. marriage officiant, surrogacy bills advance

Controversial provision would allow couples to marry each other

Published

on

Muriel Bowser, Ward 4, Washington D.C., D.C. Council, gay news, Washington Blade
Muriel Bowser, Ward 4, Washington D.C., D.C. Council, gay news, Washington Blade

D.C. Council Member Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4) has expressed concern with a provision in the temporary officiant bill that would allow couples to act as their own officiant. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

LGBT activists watched with interest last week as the D.C. City Council took steps to advance one bill that would allow more people to perform marriage ceremonies and another that would repeal a little-known city law that prohibits surrogacy parenting.

On Tuesday, June 18, the Council’s Committee of the Whole, which includes all Council members, voted to schedule a first-reading vote on June 26 for the Marriage Officiant Amendment Act of 2013.

The bill, among other things, would authorize same-sex and opposite-sex couples applying for a marriage license to designate a friend, parent, sibling or any other adult as a one-time “temporary officiant” empowered to perform the marriage. The current law limits the selection of the person who can perform a marriage ceremony to licensed clergy members, judges and court employees designated as officiants.

Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6) wrote the bill and co-introduced it with five colleagues, including gay Council members David Catania (I-At-Large) and Jim Graham (D-Ward 1).

In an unexpected development, Council member Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4), who is a candidate for mayor, exercised her authority to take the bill off the Council’s consent calendar, which would have enabled the Council to approve the bill on June 26 by unanimous consent without a roll call vote.

Bowser expressed concern about a provision in the bill that would allow couples that obtain a marriage license to act as their own officiant and to perform the marriage ceremony themselves. Bowser’s action prompted Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance President Rick Rosendall and National Capital Area ACLU Legal Director Arthur Spitzer to send email messages to each Council member expressing support for the “self-officiation” provision. The two urged the Council to retain the provision and to oppose a possible amendment introduced by Bowser to take the provision out of the bill.

Bowser told the Blade she supports the bill and expects to vote for it. But she said she took the bill off the consent agenda to enable her to ask some questions about the self-officiation provision.

“That one provision, as you know, was not in the introduced version of the bill,” she said. “And it is a departure from our witnessed and officiated ceremony for marriage in the District. And it’s a very new concept and I wanted to make sure it works…and that it gives due weight to entering into a marriage.”

Bowser said as of early this week she doesn’t plan to introduce an amendment on the Council floor to delete the provision. “Personally I favor that,” she said, referring to marriages performed by a third party officiant. “But I’m willing to listen to what people want.”

Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), who supports the bill, has suggested adding members of the City Council to the list of people authorized to perform a marriage ceremony. Rosendall and Spitzer said they have no objections to Barry’s suggestion.

In a separate action, the Council’s Judiciary and Public Safety Committee held a public hearing on June 20 on a revised version of the Surrogacy Parenting Agreement Act of 2013, which was introduced earlier this year by Catania. All 12 of Catania’s fellow Council members signed on as co-sponsors of the original bill.

The measure, renamed the Collaborative Reproduction Act of 2013, would make it legal for same-sex or opposite-sex couples — or a single intended parent — to arrange for a woman to carry a fertilized egg to term on behalf of the couple or single person. The revised bill includes language that would make the intended couple or single person the legal parents of the child. Current D.C. law prohibits surrogacy arrangements.

The 15-page draft bill discussed at the hearing includes detailed legal provisions that would help potential surrogates and couples seeking a child work out a complex arrangement to compensate the surrogate for direct and indirect costs associated with a pregnancy and the delivery of a baby in a hospital.

Gay rights attorney Nancy Polikoff, an American University law professor, called on the committee to change the bill to include in all its provisions regulations for both a “gestational” and “traditional” surrogacy. Polikoff noted that the revised bill is mostly limited to addressing gestational surrogacy.

Gestational surrogacy allows the prospective parent or parents to provide a fertilized egg to be implanted in the surrogate. The process for doing this, Polikoff said, involves a medical procedure that could cost more than $100,000, making it difficult or impossible for many prospective parents to afford.

Traditional surrogacy involves the insemination of semen from one of the members of the couple or single person into the surrogate, in which case the surrogate becomes the biological mother of the child.

Polikoff said the draft bill would legalize traditional surrogacy but it lacks the detailed procedural language in the form of a regulation that it includes for gestational surrogacy, which she said is needed to help the “traditional” surrogate and prospective parents work out a legal agreement.

“With no such regulation in place, every time a gay male couple wants to conceive and raise a child, and that couple cannot afford gestational surrogacy, they are on their own, as is the woman who agrees to help them become parents,” Polikoff said in her testimony. “I don’t think the City Council should leave to their own devices that portion of this city’s population.”

Polikoff also called for a new provision in the bill to give a surrogate a short period of time after giving birth to back out of the deal and become the legal parent of and gain custody of the child.

Phillip L. Husband, general counsel for the D.C. Department of Health, who testified on behalf of the administration of Mayor Vincent Gray, said the administration supports the legislation but offered more than two-dozen suggested changes in the bill’s wording that he said would strengthen the measure and improve the city’s ability to implement it.

The Judiciary and Public Safety Committee must next draft a final version of the bill before the measure goes to the full Council for a vote.

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