Connect with us

Opinions

Howling at the moon: Dupont group decries noise

Residents in commercial area building want city to lower music at bars

Published

on

noise, gay news, Washington Blade
noise, gay news, Washington Blade

Claiming ignorance after moving into an entertainment district should not be grounds for later complaints regarding living in a commercial zone.

The tiny cadre of chronic complainers railing against the indignities of city living in D.C.ā€™s Dupont Circle mixed-use neighborhood seldom fail to amaze and amuse.

So it was once again this week when Washington City Paper advised that yet another small ad hoc anti-business group had launched in the commercial district. Headlined ā€œCitizen Vigilante Group Forms to Combat Noise in Dupont,ā€ the publication reported that residents of the Palladium Condominium, directly adjacent to the six-lane Connecticut Avenue, N.W., commercial thoroughfare, were upset about noise from nightlife venues in the downtown area.

Named the D.C. Nightlife Noise Coalition, the assemblage appears to be the latest incarnation of one formed by Palladium resident Abigail Nichols, now a Dupont Circle neighborhood advisory commission member from district 2B-05. Her group, the Alcohol Sanity Coalition D.C., was formed in an unsuccessful effort opposing liquor-licensing reforms enacted a little over a year ago.

Nichols had argued that nightlife establishments have a monetary incentive to play music with ā€œa rhythmic beatā€ at elevated levels. She publicly claimed that ā€œalcohol tastes sweeter in the presence of loud musicā€ and that ā€œyoung males consume beer 20 percent fasterā€ when listening to it.

The new ā€œanti-noiseā€ gaggle is demanding enforcement of a city ordinance limiting exterior sound within one meter outside venues to less than 60 decibels, the equivalent of two persons laughing during normal conversation. In a 23-page document detailing their annoyance, building residents acknowledge that this measurement is equivalent to ā€œa quiet conversation.ā€

Sound measurements conducted in another part of the city by a restaurant battling objections to an outdoor patio abutting a major traffic artery registered a passing Metrobus at decibel levels in the mid-to-high-80s, with patron conversations adding no additional noise to the surrounding area. Sound meter readings by the Dupont coterie indicate that in seven of eight instances the noise level immediately outside area nightlife establishments overlapped with the ambient levels of auto traffic prior to venue opening.

This so-called ā€œcitizen groupā€ objects to standard city inspector protocol to first verify that an excessive noise level exists within the complaining personā€™s home. They argue that, according to the law, the sound measurement must be made within one meter ā€“ or 3.28 feet ā€“ of the business. City regulators, however, have discovered that businesses targeted by coordinated cliques generate anonymous phone complaints without merit or from blocks away. In a high-profile instance several years ago on U Street, officials utilized Caller ID to visit the home of a woman who had phoned in nearly 100 complaints, finding no unusual noise could be heard inside her apartment.

These Dupont dwellers are actually late to the public discussion regarding noise abatement strategies and should be careful what they wish for in any official response. A D.C. Council committee recently engaged a task force meeting for two years to make recommendations regarding revising noise regulations. Key among the determinations was requiring housing construction soundproofing materials and window qualities to prevent noise seepage into units.

That should be of concern to Steve Coniglio, developer of 70 planned units of housing on a commercially zoned street only a half-block from several nightclubs, who has joined the complaining Palladium residents around the corner. Is it not his responsibility to ensure construction includes sufficient soundproofing to mitigate noise originating within a commercial area? Or should he be allowed to build housing units not adequately designed for urban noise?

Claiming ignorance after moving into an entertainment district, however, should not be grounds for later complaints regarding living in a commercial zone.

Before this disgruntled group howls too loudly, they might pause to consider the potential downside to their whining. If the city determines that current noise restrictions are unrealistically low or unenforceable, the likely solution may be to either raise the allowable level or officially require that sound measurements be conducted inside the complainants’ domicile.

How loudly would a hearty cackle register on a sound monitor?

Mark Lee is a long-time entrepreneur and community business advocate. Follow him on Twitter, @MarkLeeDC or reach him at [email protected].

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Commentary

Reflecting on interactions with President Jimmy Carter

An LGBTQ ally and devout Christian who adored his wife of 77 years

Published

on

President Jimmy Carter (Official White House photo public domain)

Itā€™s September 1998, and Iā€™m at lunch with several other journalists and a grandmother. As I sip my Coke, I hear a friendly male voice. You can tell heā€™s smiling. ā€œTime to shake hands now,ā€ he says.

Weā€™re at the Carter Center in Atlanta for a few days. The other reporters and I have received Rosalynn Carter Fellowships for Mental Health Journalism. The grandma sitting with us is former first lady Rosalynn Carter, and the man with the warm smile is former President Jimmy Carter. ā€œAs soon as we get on a plane,ā€ Mrs. Carter says, ā€œJimmy walks down the aisles and shakes hands with everybody. He knows they want to say hi to him.ā€

Jimmy Carter died Dec. 29 in hospice care in Georgia. President Biden declared Thursday a National Day of Mourning and Carter’s funeral will take place at Washington National Cathedral that day. After the funeral, Carter and his family will return to Plains, Ga. to Maranatha Baptist Church for a private funeral and then to Carter’s private residence for interment.

Twenty-five years ago, we journos were at the Carter Center to meet with experts in mental health so we could report accurately on the issue.  

The fellowship program was founded in 1996 by Rosalynn Carter. Mrs. Carter, who died in 2023 at age 96, was no mere figurehead. She knew every detail about our fellowship projects. Heaven help us, if sheā€™d caught us asleep at the switch.

It takes nothing away from Mrs. Carter to note how essential her personal and professional partnership with her husband Jimmy Carter was to her and her work.

Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter were married in 1946. The first thing that hit you when you saw them together was how deeply they loved each other. There was nothing sappy about how they were with each other.

One morning, President Carter ambled into the conference room before our session on stigma and mental health was about to begin. Kenneth W. Starr had just delivered his report on (then) President Bill Clintonā€™s alleged abuses and affair with Monica Lewinsky. Naturally, we, the reporters in the room, asked Jimmy Carter how he felt about Bill Clinton. We were committed to mental health journalism. But, a former president was there ā€“ standing by the wall.

President Carter didnā€™t seem to want to hold back. He said he didnā€™t think that highly of Bill Clinton. But, before he could go on to say more, Mrs. Carter gave him a look. The look you give your spouse after decades of loving togetherness. Especially, if youā€™re a political couple and your mateā€™s being grilled by scribes eager to make news. ā€œI know,ā€ Jimmy Carter said, smiling, to Rosalynn Carter, his most ardent supporter and astute critic, ā€œIā€™m talking too much, darlinā€™. Iā€™m leaving now.ā€

You could tell how proud President Carter was of Mrs. Carter. At lunch or dinner, youā€™d see him nodding approvingly at her when she spoke of her work. You could see it in how he teased her. ā€œRosalynn talks about mental health all the time,ā€ Jimmy Carter said, with a laugh, one night, as he saw Mrs. Carter chatting with us about how the media reported on mental health.

What I most recall about Jimmy Carter is his generosity of spirit. ā€œI beat Jerry Ford,ā€ President Carter said, ā€œbut Rosalyn and I are good friends with the Fords now.ā€

He wasnā€™t using the word ā€œfriendsā€ in the way politicos often do. The Carters and the Fords were friends who worked together on mental health and other issues.

I hadnā€™t yet come out as a lesbian when I was at the Carter Center. But I didnā€™t feel I had to remain closeted or silent about my (then) partner. Carter was, what today likely would be an oxymoron: a born-again Christian, who welcomed everyone.

The Carter Center, which the Carters founded after his presidency, is like a theme park, where, instead of standing in line for attractions, people work to resolve conflicts and eradicate diseases.

Thank you, President Carter for your work, humanity and being an LGBTQ ally. R.I.P., Jimmy Carter.


Kathi Wolfe, a writer and poet, was a regular contributor to the Blade. She wrote this tribute just before she passed away in June 2024.

Continue Reading

Opinions

D.C.ā€™s sexual harassment laws will better protect LGBTQ people

Leading the nation in enacting robust policies for workers

Published

on

(Blade file image by Aram Varitan)

In recent weeks, the D.C. Council passed the Fairness in Human Rights Administration Amendment Act. Provided that this bill is signed by Mayor Bowser and not objected to by Congress, it will correct some of the loopholes in the Districtā€™s sexual harassment laws that were overlooked when the Council passed the latest iteration of the D.C. Human Rights Act in 2022.

In this dangerous moment for women, transgender, and non-binary people, when it appears that incoming federal leaders are hostile to protecting the rights of these vulnerable groups, more robust local protection is a needed step in the right direction. This new D.C. law, when it goes into effect, means that more people who have been harassed because of their gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression will be able to escape unfair arbitration clauses and file, publicly, in court. Historically, mandatory arbitration operates as a tool for companies to keep sexual harassment and assault accusations a secret. 

While the D.C. Human Rights Act is, in my view, one of the better human rights acts in the country, it is encouraging to see that the D.C. Council is also willing to expand it to make sure more folks can make use of it to protect themselves. This legislation provides a series of fixes that significantly change the landscape of sexual harassment claims in D.C.  First ā€“ the act provides a more expansive definition of sexual harassment. This may appear insignificantā€”but itā€™s not! Right now, the narrow definition under D.C. law says that sexual harassment is limited to ā€œconduct of a sexual nature.ā€  This covers the most egregious and brazen types of sexual harassment, the kind of behavior that often leads to news articles, like sending a colleague unsolicited sexual messages or photographs; using sexually degrading language or slurs; or asking intrusive questions about someoneā€™s sexual preferences.  It doesnā€™t include, however, the wide spectrum of sexual harassment that I see in working with clients every day: harassment based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression.

This can take a lot of forms, like calling someone sex-based, but not sexual, slurs in the workplace; penalizing someone if they do not dress feminine or masculine ā€œenoughā€; or spreading rumors about someone because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation. Mind you, the D.C. Human Rights Act already banned harassment based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression before this new act; but this new act now includes all of those forms of harassment as under the umbrella of sexual harassment.  

Why is it important? Federal law prohibits forced arbitration of sexual assault and sexual harassment cases nationwide, because it is an unfair forum for survivors of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Under federal law, courts have recognized that sex-based conduct may create a hostile work environment constituting sexual harassment, whether or not the conduct is ā€œsexual in nature.ā€ But the D.C. Human Rights Act, until this latest expansion, limited sexual harassment to conduct that is sexual in nature. As a result, harassment based on gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity could be forced to go to unfair arbitration in D.C. ā€“ which this new law fixes.  Provided this is signed into law and Congress does not object, those who have been harassed on these bases will be able to publicly pursue these claims against their employers in court.

In addition to this meaningful expansion of the definition of sexual harassment, this new law also increases the statute of limitations of when claims can be brought from one year to two years. This extends the time a person who experiences harassment has to file a claim.

Many of these changes demonstrate the Districtā€™s commitment to leading the nation in enacting robust protections for workers and in resisting sexual harassment in all of its forms. Iā€™m grateful to the D.C. Council for their work to make these changes a reality.


Mx. Rachel Green is a plaintiffsā€™ sexual harassment attorney at Katz Banks Kumin LLP and advocated before the D.C. Council for many of these changes to the law.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Jimmy Carterā€™s LGBTQ legacy

Decent leader broke campaign promise to support Equality Act

Published

on

President Jimmy Carter (Screen capture via CBS Sunday Morning/YouTube)

Jimmy Carter is venerated for his many notable accomplishments including support for African-American civil rights, Nobel Prize recipient, energy security, conservation, transportation deregulation, and remarkable post-presidency accomplishments, among others. As to LGBTQ rights, Carterā€™s less than admirable White House legacy reflects societal prejudices during his 1977 to 1981 presidency.

At the 1972 Democratic National Convention, the Platform Committee rejected by a vote of 54 to 34 a plank to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. At that convention, Jim Foster and Madeline Davis became the first openly gay delegates to address a national political conventionā€™s plenary session. Foster and Davisā€™s addresses on July 12 were scheduled at 5 a.m. for Minority Report #8, which Walter Cronkite called ā€œthe Gay Lib plank.ā€

As a 1976 presidential candidate, Carter courageously endorsed the Equality Act, which would amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation. Carter appointed Midge Constanza, a closeted lesbian to head his Office of Public Liaison. Constanza, a former Rochester City Council member, had served as Carterā€™s New York State campaign coordinator. Constanza was the only woman in a senior position on Carterā€™s White House staff. 

On March 26, 1977, Constanza hosted the first meeting of gay representatives at the White House. The group of 12 included gay pioneer Frank Kameny, Rev. Troy Perry, and Jenn Oā€™Leary and Bruce Voeller, co-chairs of the National Gay Task Force. After being alerted by a National Gay Task Force press release, major news organizations covered the story. The following day, Anita Bryant, who started a Christian crusade against homosexual rights stated that the Office of the President had been duped into blessing an abnormal lifestyle and vowed to ā€œlead such a crusade to stop homosexuals as this country has not seen before.ā€

By 1978, Constanza was demoted; her office moved from adjoining the Oval Office to the basement; and her staff of more than a dozen cut to one. In August 1978, she resigned.

In November 1977, Harvey Milk became a San Francisco Supervisor. He was one of the first openly gay Americans to be elected to public office. In 1978, Milk was assassinated. That year 70% of Americans opposed discrimination protections based on sexual orientation. In 1979, Carter launched his campaign for reelection. 

At the 1980 Democratic National Convention, 77 of the seated delegates were openly gay and lesbian up from the handful at the 1976 convention. Melvin Boozer, an African-American Ph.D. from Yale and head of the DC Gay Activists Alliance was nominated for vice president of the United States. In Boozerā€™s remarks, he stated he wouldnā€™t accept the nomination, but called on delegates to adopt the gay rights plank.

Twelve years later, at the 1992 Democratic National Convention and with the support of party presidential candidate Bill Clinton that Bob Hattoy, a gay man with AIDS and Roberta Achtenberg, cofounder of the National Center for Lesbian Rights became the first openly gay delegates to address the convention in prime time. There were rainbow flags and signs for ā€œLesbian and Gay Rights Now!ā€ 

Carter did not embrace homophobia. He was one of the nationā€™s most decent and foresighted leaders. While he disappointingly broke his campaign promise to support the Equality Act, like other historic figures Carterā€™s record should be assessed within the context of societyā€™s then social constructs and political realities. 

Based on the totality of his legacy, Jimmy Carter left the world a better place. His memory is a blessing.

Malcolm Lazin is executive director of LGBT History Month. Learn more at lgbtHistoryMonth.com.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular