Commentary
Reaching a reasonable D.C. minimum wage hike
Council members exhibit haste to act without fully evaluating impact

‘We’re going to get a minimum wage increase,’ D.C. Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6) predicted in an interview last Friday.
D.C. Council member Tommy Wells is impatient to raise the local minimum wage. He hopes his colleagues will move quickly to enact an additional local hike above the national rate.
A hasty and haphazard decision, however, will harm those he hopes to help.
“We’re going to get a minimum wage increase,” Wells predicted in an interview last Friday. On that, there is little doubt – and scant opposition. Controversy centers on what constitutes a reasonable amount.
Wells indicated that he is not “wedded to a pride of ownership” on the issue. Regardless, his legislative proposal, one of three and enjoying the sponsorship of a majority of his colleagues, will likely be the framework for Council consideration.
Wells wants to raise the local rate by another dollar in each of the next two years, to a total of $10.25 beginning July 31, 2015. The current $8.25 is a dollar higher than the federal rate and in both neighboring Maryland and Virginia. Subsequent automatic annual increases would be tied to the higher “urban” Consumer Price Index. Wells also provides for a partially mitigating employer credit up to 25 percent of assessed property taxes for small businesses with annual gross revenues up to $2.5 million.
Wells has crafted an outline that, with modest downward revision in amount, a more measured implementation schedule and additional business offsets, merits approval. As offered, it would exceed the few elevated state rates nationwide, most by much.
Smarter in approach is that already initiated by D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray, who advocates a “reasonable” minimum wage increase. Gray has launched an expedited yet thorough examination of the scope and impact of variable increases. D.C. Council member Muriel Bowser has introduced legislation to create a Minimum Wage Revision Commission comprised of stakeholders and economists to fully assess the implications.
The mayor is correct to have undertaken assemblage of facts to inform action. Otherwise the unintended consequences and counterproductive results of too high an increase, too rapid a schedule or insufficient business offsets are a risk. Likewise, Bowser’s instinct to know-before-voting is deserving of Council approval.
Only 0.005 percent of those employed at District jobs, or approximately 4,000 workers, are paid the hourly minimum. According to the most recent Bureau of Labor Statistics report, 12 percent of D.C. jobs are hourly compensated.
The D.C. Council has not identified the demographics, skills, occupations or industries of hourly-wage jobs or determined the range and prevailing hourly amount paid. Nor have they appraised the likely effects on employment or net wages and benefits, or other factors. They have not considered the impact that upward pressure on hourly wages for those currently paid above the minimum will have on net employment.
They’re flying blind.
Wells would also admirably increase personal income tax standard deductions, but in advance of Council review of tax reforms recommended by the D.C. Tax Revision Commission, chaired by former Mayor Anthony Williams. Again, he wants to drag the cart up ahead of the horse.
A city desperate for new entry-level jobs with unemployment near 9 percent that graduates only 60 percent of high school students cannot afford to endanger the creation and availability of low-skill modest-wage employment opportunities. More than 11,000 applied in the first week for 1,800 jobs at planned Walmart stores following recent defeat of a large retailer minimum wage mandate of $12.50 an hour.
A sensible minimum wage adjustment must factor prevailing wages for hourly workers to prevent potential job losses or a net reduction in employment. Too steep an increase will result in reluctance to hire or the retention of existing employees for maximum staffing flexibility with a roll-back in hours to manage rising costs, or a reduction in benefits – particularly at small businesses.
Broad agreement exists for a reasonable and responsible increase in the local minimum wage. The D.C. Council needs to steady the rush to passage to ensure that it is both.
Mark Lee is a long-time entrepreneur and community business advocate. Follow on Twitter: @MarkLeeDC. Reach him at [email protected].
Commentary
Center Arts Gallery celebrates 10 years with reception, auction
Oct. 17 fundraiser to feature jazz combo, artwork created on site
Ten years ago, I had a vision: to create a dedicated space within The DC LGBTQ+ Community Center for local LGBTQ+ artists to share their creativity in a community space conceived specifically for them. That vision became the Center Arts Gallery. Over the past decade, the Center Arts Gallery has grown into a true home for our LGBTQ+ siblings, a place illuminating our joy, resistance, and resilience through the power of art.
Art is so much more than decoration. It can be a powerful protest, a keeper of memories, a testament to survival, and a vivid reminder that our lived experiences deserve to be seen, heard, and deeply valued. When we created the Center Arts Gallery, our goal was to remove barriers so that queer artists could feel welcomed, supported, and completely free to express themselves. Now, as we mark the incredible 10th anniversary of Center Arts, love truly comes full circle as many of those same amazing artists and creatives are giving back by donating their artwork for a special benefit auction.
On Saturday, Oct. 17, 2026, The DC LGBTQ+ Community Center will host our annual Fall Reception and Art Auction, celebrating 10 years of Center Arts Gallery at 1827 Wiltberger St., N.W., with an ambitious fundraising target of $25,000.
Appropriately themed “The Art of Belonging,” this milestone celebration will bring our community together with intention, uniting multiple forms of local queer creativity under one roof. The evening promises to be an unforgettable experience.
We are thrilled to have the celebration hosted by award-winning spoken word artist, poet, and educator Charity Blackwell. Attendees will enjoy smooth jazz selections performed by 2nd Independence — a jazz combo from the DC Different Drummers — alongside delicious heavy hors d’oeuvres provided by Shaw Tavern and exquisite dessert offerings by celebrity chef Patrick Vanas.
Throughout the night artwork will be created live on site, joining the online pieces generously donated by local artists.
Most importantly, every dollar raised during the reception and auction goes directly toward sustaining The DC Center’s life-affirming programs and supportive services. From food assistance providing nourishing meals, the free food pantry, and behavioral health counseling, to trauma-informed case management, resource navigation, HIV/STI testing, and essential hygiene services like showers, laundry, and a clothing boutique, our doors remain open because
of community support. These funds also support our cyber lounge, mail and locker services, harm reduction supplies, and critical wellness programs.
To ensure that everyone in our community can fully participate, ASL interpretation will be provided during the event program. We offer flexible ways to join us: General Admission is free (currently at capacity), with custom signature cocktails, wine, and beer available for purchase.
For those looking for an elevated evening, our $75 VIP Experience includes early admission at 6 p.m., early online auction access, complimentary Champagne (6-7 p.m.), an intimate opportunity to mingle with participating artists, a special swag bag, plus an open beer and wine bar throughout the entire evening.
For 10 years, Center Arts Gallery has shown us that belonging is an art form we create together. As we look back on a decade of community and look forward to the future, I invite you to join us, support local queer artists, and invest in the essential programs that keep our community thriving. Let’s come together to ensure that The DC Center can continue to educate, empower, uplift, and connect us all for generations to come.
Kimberley Bush is executive director of The DC LGBTQ+ Community Center.
Commentary
Washington Blade responds to concerns over White House pool duties
Inaccurate media reports create confusion but we stand with our colleagues
Last week, President Trump announced his unconstitutional ban of CNN, MSNow, and Politico from the White House. Coincidentally, on Monday, it was the Washington Blade’s turn to serve as the print pool reporter on duty covering the president’s actions that day. This important responsibility is shared and rotated among the print members with each serving roughly once per month. The Blade is the only LGBTQ outlet with a seat in the briefing room, a slot in the pool rotation, and membership in the White House Correspondents’ Association, something we fought for decades to secure after enduring years of discrimination, ridicule, and resistance to openly queer journalists working inside the White House. We take our responsibilities there seriously.
There are two pools that cover the president: broadcast and print. The other four members of the broadcast pool — ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox News — agreed to boycott their pool duties. There has been no boycott among the print pool, which is a separate entity. I called the president of the White House Correspondents’ Association on Monday to confirm that no outlets in the print pool were boycotting.
A boycott by the Blade would set us back and lead to our expulsion from the pool and briefing room and our replacement by a right-wing outlet sympathetic to President Trump’s approach to attacking the media. The LGBTQ community is far better served with the Blade in the room than a far-right blogger taking our seat.
Let’s be clear: the Blade stands for diversity, equity, and inclusion and we stand for the First Amendment and freedom of the press. In solidarity with the broadcast pool, we made two important decisions on Monday — the first day anyone had to think about any of this. First, we refused to take or share any videos or still photos of the president, which would have undermined the broadcast boycott. Second, when Politico’s turn comes up for pool duty in mid-October, the Blade will not fill in and cover for them while they are banned. Politico must be readmitted and allowed to do their job.
After a rough day navigating and reporting on all of this, the Advocate published a reckless and inaccurate story suggesting that the Blade had crossed a picket line. Not true, as there is no print pool boycott. They claimed that I wouldn’t talk to their reporter. Also not true. I called their reporter within 90 minutes of receiving his message and he didn’t take the call or call me back. Their story named me and our White House reporter, immediately exposing us to public criticism and worse. The environment in D.C. is so toxic and even violent these days that subjecting our staff to unfair and false accusations like this invites harassment, doxxing, and worse. To do that without even talking to us is next level irresponsible and the antithesis of journalism.
On Tuesday, I talked to two reporters and an editor at the Advocate but they refused to retract anything in their inaccurate story. If the reporter had returned my call, I could have explained all of this but they are more concerned with clickbait and sensational headlines, a dangerous practice in these troubled times.
Back to the pool. The Blade was in the briefing room in the Reagan era, when Press Secretary Larry Speakes made jokes about AIDS and the reporters in the room laughed out loud. We endured all of that abuse and worse for decades, always standing in the back of the room and never being called on. The Blade’s journalists persevered. When President George W. Bush was re-elected in 2004, the Blade’s White House credentials were revoked amid an earlier press crackdown. Notably, no one boycotted or stood up for us. When Barack Obama won election in 2008, I received an email from his communications director informing me that effective midnight on Jan. 20, 2009, the Blade’s credentials would be restored.
So we have had quite a ride navigating administrations and their changing requirements for gaining access but always playing the long game. As Barney Frank used to say, “If you’re not at the table, then you’re probably on the menu.” The Blade is at the table and we do our best to ensure the LGBTQ community’s issues are addressed by both parties.
Thanks for reading and supporting the Blade’s work. If you have questions about our approach, you can reach me at [email protected].
Kevin Naff is editor of the Washington Blade. Reach him at [email protected].
Commentary
What LGBTQ veterans are building after ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
DADT repeal took effect on Sept. 20, 2011. Trans servicemember ban reinstated
Fifteen years ago this month, the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” took effect. At the time, the importance of the change was obvious: gay, lesbian, and bisexual Americans would no longer have to hide who they were to wear the uniform. What was harder to see was what would follow: a generation of LGBTQ veterans able to carry their service openly into American civic life.
Earlier this month, Alaska state Rep. Andrew Gray, an Army veteran, stood before the Anchorage Assembly and asked the city to recognize Sept. 20 as LGBTQ Veterans Day.
His former command sergeant major, Mike Grunst, followed him to the microphone. A 35-year veteran who had served in combat, Grunst called troops who had served while hiding who they were “the bravest I have ever served with.”
Then Denise Sudbeck stepped forward. A Vietnam-era Navy veteran, she thanked the country for the privilege of serving and asked that the next generation have the same chance.
The Assembly approved the recognition.
Nothing about the scene required a new vocabulary. A veteran made a request of his community. A commander vouched for those who served beside him. Another veteran asked that younger Americans inherit the opportunity she valued. They entered the civic record simply as veterans.
That identity can do more than win recognition.
When federal policy abruptly ended the careers of transgender servicemembers this year, veterans and servicemembers in California began asking a practical question: What happens when those Americans come home?
Republican Assemblyman Jeff Gonzalez, a Marine combat veteran, began one hearing with questions about transgender military service. He listened as veterans explained how the military handles medical care and deployment case by case.
Then the discussion turned to separation.
“I don’t wanna see any veteran homeless,” Gonzalez said. Before the hearing ended, he was asking: “How can I help? How can I understand? How can I be a good advocate?”
The legislation that followed would provide housing, employment and transition assistance to discharged servicemembers. Republican state Sen. Shannon Grove spoke for it. The Senate passed it 32 to 0.
Americans have plainly not settled their disagreements over transgender people. Nor should military service be a prerequisite for rights that belong to every citizen.
But military service creates relationships that are difficult to reduce to the abstractions of the culture war. Before a legislature, “the transgender issue” can become a veteran who deployed, an officer who led troops, or the person who once stood beside you.
The political question changes because the human relationship has already changed.
The pattern is beginning to appear across the country. Kansas is among the states recognizing LGBTQ Veterans Day for the first time this year. New York and Virginia are pursuing broader state-level programs for LGBTQ veterans.
Sept. 20 is deliberate. On that day in 2011, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ended.
We usually remember repeal for what LGBTQ Americans gained: the ability to serve openly. Fifteen years later, we can also see what the country gained.
A gay veteran can stand before his local government beside the commander who once led him. A transgender servicemember can sit before a legislator who begins with doubts and ends by asking how he can help. A veteran from an older generation can ask her neighbors to give those who follow her the same chance to serve.
This is citizenship in practice.
The enduring legacy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal is not only that Americans were finally allowed to serve openly. It is also what they can now build after coming home.
-
Afghanistan4 days agoICC unseals arrest warrants for Taliban officials accused of persecuting LGBTQ people, women
-
District of Columbia4 days agoPhysician: addiction doesn’t always look the way you think it does
-
Calendar4 days agoCalendar: October 9-15
-
Opinions3 days agoSolidarity beyond the parade: the actual cost of Pride
