Connect with us

District of Columbia

Too soon to decide on candidate for D.C. mayor: activists

Bowser, two Council challengers considered strong LGBTQ supporters

Published

4 years ago

on

Mayor Muriel Bowser announced her intent to run for re-election last week. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Several D.C. LGBTQ activists this week said they believe it is too soon for the city’s LGBTQ community to make a decision on whom to support for mayor in the 2022 mayoral election, especially since the three well-known Democratic candidates for mayor are longtime LGBTQ allies.

Most but not all the local activists contacted by the Washington Blade in an informal survey who called for holding off on deciding on whom to back for mayor expressed those views one week after Mayor Muriel Bowser announced she filed papers to run for a third term in office in the city’s June 21, 2022, Democratic primary.

The mayor’s announcement came about a month after D.C. Council member Robert White (D-At-Large) and Council member Trayon White (D-Ward 8) announced they would run for mayor in the Democratic primary.

With the overwhelming majority of D.C. voters registered as Democrats, the winner of the Democratic primary for mayor has always won the November general election since the city’s home rule elected government took effect in the 1970s.

Robert White, like Bowser, filed papers to run under the city’s Fair Election program that offers public financing for candidates who must accept campaign contributions no greater than $100 from individual donors in a citywide election.

Trayon White had yet to officially file papers for his mayoral bid as of early this week, but his supporters have said he, too, was expected to run under the Fair Election public financing program.

“I think it’s much too early,” said gay Democratic activist Earl Fowlkes, when asked if he was currently backing one of the mayoral candidates.

Fowlkes was elected last week as vice president of legislative affairs for the Capital Stonewall Democrats, D.C.’s largest local LGBTQ political group. He also serves as executive director of the D.C.-based national LGBTQ group Center for Black Equity.

“People are going to have to listen to the candidates and look at their records and make a decision accordingly,” Fowlkes said. “I think the mayor has a good record and Robert White is certainly a friend of our community,” he said. “And Trayon White has also made great strides in understanding our issues.”

Like other local activists, Fowlkes said D.C.’s longstanding status as an LGBTQ supportive local city government with far reaching LGBTQ rights legislation in place means that LGBTQ voters will turn to other issues on which to base their support for a mayoral candidate.

“It’s no longer that you can silo just on LGBTQ issues,” said Fowlkes. “We have to worry about homelessness for all citizens, not just queer citizens, but everyone. Access to healthcare – those are important to everyone whether you’re LGBTQ or not,” he said. “And I think that our rights as LGBTQ Washingtonians are pretty enshrined in legislation. And I don’t think that’s an issue.”

Similar to past election cycles, Fowlkes said Capital Stonewall Democrats will hold a series of candidate forums in the spring of 2022, including a mayoral candidate forum, in which candidates will be invited to discuss issues of concern to the LGBTQ community. The forums are part of the organization’s process for endorsing candidates for mayor, D.C. Council, and other elective offices, which the LGBTQ Democratic group will make prior to the June 21` Democratic primary.

Lesbian activist Barbara Helmick, who serves as director of programs for the D.C. statehood advocacy group called D.C. Vote, said she agrees it’s too soon for D.C. residents to decide on a mayoral candidate. But Helmick said D.C. statehood should be at the top of the list of issues of concern for the LGBTQ community in the mayoral election.

“We as a vulnerable community will be particularly vulnerable to conservative movements that have a lot of power in this country right now,” Helmick said. “And our best protection against that is having self-government, to be able to elect representatives who will speak for us in Congress,” she said. “We need senators. We need a voting member of the House for whatever conservatives may be coming up with.”

Helmick was referring to past instances where Congress used its authority to overturn or block D.C. laws, which she said could happen again if conservative Republicans regain control of Congress in the 2022 midterm elections. She said the city’s LGBTQ rights protections could be in jeopardy by a hostile Congress.

While noting that Bowser and Robert and Trayon White have been advocates for D.C. statehood, Helmick said the mere expression of support is not enough. “What are each of them going to do?” she said.

June Crenshaw, executive director of the Wanda Alston Foundation, the D.C. group that provides housing services for homeless LGBTQ youth, said that while her organization does not endorse candidates for public office it will be closely monitoring the candidates’ positions on issues that impact LGBTQ youth.

“We’ll be involved in the process because our next mayor or our existing mayor really has to make sure that they are caring for queer and LGBTQ folks in their budget process and in their programming process,” Crenshaw said.

Ron Moten, one of the founders and lead adviser for Check It Enterprises, an Anacostia-based LGBTQ community services center and small business, said the organization has not endorsed candidates in the past but it would consider the possibility of doing so. However, he said choosing between the three main Democratic mayoral candidates would be difficult.

“All of them have supported Check It,” he said. “Robert White introduced legislation to help us get our building,” Moten said. “The mayor has helped us get grants to do the things we are doing. And Trayon White has always supported everything that we’ve done.”

Gay Democratic activist John Klenert, who is among those calling for waiting a few months before deciding on which mayoral candidate to support, said LGBTQ voters along with all voters would benefit by taking time to reflect on the candidates.

“Let’s catch our breath and take a look,” said Klenert, who agrees that the three main Democratic mayoral candidates have good records on LGBTQ issues. “Let’s see,” he said. “The past is one thing. What are they promising for the future, not only for our community but for the city in general?”

The Blade could find just two prominent D.C. LGBTQ activists who have come out in support for a D.C. mayoral candidate at this time.

Rick Rosendall, former president of the D.C. Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance, announced on Facebook that he’s supporting Robert White.

“Robert White is thoughtful, decent, progressive and experienced, and has shown a willingness to take on controversial issues, as when he co-sponsored sex work decriminalization favored by at-risk members of our community and those of us who support them,” Rosendall told the Blade in a statement. Rosendall noted that Robert White received a +10 GLAA candidate rating, the highest possible rating, when he ran for reelection to his Council seat in 2020.

Gay Democratic activist John Fanning, an elected member of the Logan Circle Advisory Neighborhood Commission, said he is backing Mayor Bowser’s reelection campaign on grounds that she has served the city “exceptionally well” during her first two terms in office.

“I believe the mayor and her administration’s response to the pandemic was exceptional, because if the mayor and her administration didn’t do what they did when they needed to do it, there would have been more deaths,” Fanning told the Blade.

“And I also think that carving out a space regarding racial justice and social justice with Black Lives Matter Plaza” is also one of the mayor’s important accomplishments, Fanning said. “And she took on Donald Trump when we needed somebody to speak up for the residents of the District of Columbia,” he said.

Citing other actions by the mayor that Fanning said he believes has benefited the city, including an affordable housing program, Fanning added, “I’m not sure we need to make a change right now.”

Mark Lee, coordinator of the D.C. Nightlife Council, a nonprofit trade association that advocates for restaurants, bars and nightclubs, said the group does not officially endorse political candidates. But Lee said individual members of the DCNC, including representatives of LGBT bars and other LGBT venues, are “overwhelmingly supportive” of the reelection of Mayor Bowser and D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large).

“Both Mayor Bowser and Phil Mendelson appreciate the massive economic contribution that nightlife provides to the District’s economy and understand the challenges local establishments face as we emerge from the pandemic period,” Lee said. “Both Bowser and Mendelson continue to support our city’s largest hometown independent small business sector and nightlife operators are eager to return that support,” he said. 

Records from the D.C. Office of Campaign Finance show that two lesser-known candidates have also filed papers to run in the D.C. Democratic primary for mayor in June – James Butler, a former Ward 5 ANC commissioner and unsuccessful 2018 mayoral candidate; and community activist Michael Campbell.

Another three lesser known candidates have filed papers to run for mayor as non-Democrats—community activist Rodney “Red” Grant is running as an independent; community activist Barbara Summers is also running as an independent; and Corren Brown is running as a Statehood Green Party candidate.

Their positions on LGBTQ issues couldn’t immediately be determined. 

Related Topics:
Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

Judge issues revised order in Capital Pride stalking case

Defendant Darren Pasha agreed to accept less restrictive directive

Published

2 days ago

on

May 1, 2026

By

Darren Pasha (Washington Blade photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

A D.C. Superior Court judge on April 30 reinstated an anti-stalking order requested by the Capital Pride Alliance against local gay activist Darren Pasha based on allegations that Pasha engaged in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk the organization’s staff, board members, and volunteers.

The reinstated order by Judge Robert D. Okun followed an April 17 court hearing in which he rescinded a similar order he initially approved in February on grounds that more evidence was needed to substantiate the need for the order.   

At the time he rescinded the earlier order he scheduled an evidentiary hearing for April 29 at which three Capital Pride staff members testified in support of the anti-stalking order. But Okun discontinued the hearing after Pasha, who was representing himself without an attorney, announced he was willing to accept a revised, less restrictive temporary restraining order.

The judge said Pasha’s decision to accept a restraining order made it no longer necessary to continue the evidentiary hearing. He then asked Capital Pride and Pasha to submit their suggested revisions for the order which they submitted a short time later.

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 staff, board members, and volunteers. It includes a 167-page addendum of “supporting exhibits” that includes multiple statements by unidentified witnesses.

Pasha, who has represented himself without an attorney, has argued in multiple court filings and motions that the stalking allegations are untrue. In his initial court response to the complaint, he 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.

Similar to his earlier anti-stalking order against Pasha, Okun’s reissued order on April 30 states, a “Temporary Anti-Stalking Order is GRANTED, effective immediately and remaining in effect until further order of the Court or final disposition of this matter.”

It adds, “The defendant shall not contact, attempt to contact, harass, threaten, or otherwise communicate with any protected person, directly or indirectly, including through third parties, social media, electronic communication, or any other means.”

Unlike the earlier order, which did not identify the “protected persons” by name, the latest order includes a list of 34 people, 13 of whom are Capital Pride staff members or volunteers, including CEO Ryan Bos and Chief Operating Officer June Crenshaw. The other 21 people listed are identified as Capital Pride board members, including board chair Anna Jinkerson.

Possibly because Pasha addressed this in his suggested version of the order, the judge’s revised order says Pasha is allowed to visit the D.C. LGBTQ+ Community Center, where the Capital Pride office is located, if he gives the community center a 24 hour advance notice that he will be visiting the center, which hosts many events unrelated to Capital Pride. The earlier order required him to stay at least 100 feet away from the Capital Pride office.

The new order also prohibits Pasha from attending 21 named events that Capital Pride Alliance either organizes itself or with partner organizations that were scheduled to take place from April 30 through June 21. The order says he is allowed to attend the two largest events, the June 20 Pride Parade and the June 21 Pride Festival and Concert, in which 500,000 or more people are expected to attend.

It says Pasha is also allowed to attend the June 15 Pride At The Pier event organized by the Washington Blade.

But for those three events the order says he is restricted from entering “ticketed and controlled access areas.”

At the April 29 court hearing, Okun also scheduled a mandatory remote mediation session for July 23, in which efforts would be made to resolve the civil complaint case brought by Capital Pride without going to trial. 

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Both sides propose revised orders in Capital Pride stalking case

Defendant Darren Pasha agreed to accept less restrictive directive

Published

3 days ago

on

April 30, 2026

By

Darren Pasha (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

An evidentiary hearing in D.C. Superior Court on April 29 in which the Capital Pride Alliance presented three of four planned witnesses to testify in support of its civil complaint that D.C. gay activist Darren Pasha engaged in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk its staff, board members, and volunteers ended abruptly at the direction of the judge.

Judge Robert D. Okun announced from the bench that the hearing, which was intended provide Capital Pride an opportunity to present evidence in support of its request to reinstate an anti-stalking order against Pasha that the judge temporarily rescinded on April 17, was no longer needed because Pasha stated at the hearing that he is willing to accept a revised, less restrictive temporary restraining order.

Pasha made that statement after two Capital Pride witnesses — June Crenshaw and Vincenzo Volpe — each testified in support of the stalking allegations against Pasha for over an hour under questioning from Capital Pride attorney Nick Harrison and under cross-examination from Pasha, who is representing himself without an attorney.

After Capital Pride’s third witness, Tifany Royster, testified for just a few minutes, and after the judge called a recess for lunch and to attend to an unrelated case, Pasha announced that after obtaining legal advice he determined that he was unsuited to continue cross-examining the witnesses. He said he would be willing to accept a significantly less restrictive temporary restraining order.

Okun then ruled that the evidentiary hearing was no longer needed and directed Capital Pride and Pasha to submit to him their version of a revised stay away order. He said he would use their proposed revisions to help him develop his own order, which he would issue after deliberating over the matter.

He also scheduled a mandatory remote mediation session for July 23, in which efforts would be made to resolve the case without going to trial. He then adjourned the hearing at 3:50 p.m.

The online Superior Court docket for the case stated after the hearing ended that the judge would issue “a new modified Temporary Protective Order,” but it did not say when it would be issued.   

Shortly before the April 29 hearing began at 11 a.m., Harrison filed a “Draft Temporary Anti-Stalking Order” that included a list of 34 “Protected Persons” that Harrison said during the hearing were affiliated with Capital Pride Alliance as staff and board members, volunteers, and others associated with the group.

The proposed order stated, “The defendant shall not contact, attempt to contact, harass, threaten, or otherwise communicate with any protected person, directly or indirectly, including through third parties, social media, electronic communications, or any other means.”

The proposal represented a significant change from Capital Pride’s initial civil complaint against Pasha filed in February that Pasha claimed called for him to stay away at least 200 yards from all Capital pride staff, board members, and volunteers without naming them. Okun granted that stay away request in February but reduced the stay away distance to 100 feet.

Capital Pride attorney Harrison disputes Pasha’s interpretation of the order, saying the 100-foot stay-away was for events, not for individual Capital Pride staff, volunteers, or board members. He said the order prohibited Pasha from engaging in any way with the Capital Pride staffers, volunteers or board members.

But the proposed order Capital Pride at first submitted at the April 29 hearing  also called for Pasha to stay away from and to not attend as many as 25 Capital Pride events scheduled to take place this year from April 30 through June 21 and for him to say away from the Capital Pride office located at 1827 Wiltberger St., N.W., which is the building in which it shares with the DC LGBTQ Community Center.

At the April 29 hearing, at Pasha’s request, Okun called on Capital Pride to consider allowing Pasha to attend at least the two largest events — the Capital Pride Parade and Festival — which draw over 500,000 participants.

Harrison said in a follow-up message to the judge following the hearing that Capital Pride would allow Pasha to attend those two events and one other as long as he stays away from “ticketed and controlled access areas.”

At an April 17 status hearing Okun rescinded the earlier stay away order at Pasha’s request, among other things, on grounds that it was too vague and didn’t provide Pasha with sufficient specific information on who to stay away from. It was at that hearing that Okun scheduled the April 29 evidentiary hearing, saying it would give Capital Pride a chance to provide sufficient evidence to justify an anti-stalking order and Pasha an opportunity to challenge the evidence.  

In his own response to the initial civil complaint filed in February and in subsequent court filings, Pasha has strongly denied he engaged in stalking and has alleged that the complaint was a form of retaliation against him over a dispute he has had with Capital Pride and its former board president, Ashley Smith.

Like its initial complaint filed in February, Capital Pride filed a multipage document at the start of the April 29 hearing with written testimony from staff members and volunteers who allege that Pasha did engage in stalking, harassment, and intimidating behavior toward them and others.

Like Capital Pride, Pasha following the April 29 hearing, filed his own proposed version of the stay away order with significantly less restrictions than the Capital Pride proposal. Among other things, it calls for him to restrict his contact with Capital Pride CEO Ryan Bos and Crenshaw but says it “does not by its terms restrict the defendant’s communications with any other person, entity, governmental body, or media outlet.”

“Darren Pasha sent multiple messages to us and to the court after the proceedings asking for further modifications — which we are not accepting or responding to,” Harrison told the Blade in response to a request for further comment on Judge’s request for each side to submit proposed revisions of the stay away order.

“We appreciate the court’s time and careful attention to the evidence presented today,” Harrison told the Washington Blade in a written statement after the hearing. “This process was about bringing forward the experiences of individuals who reported a pattern of conduct that caused fear, serious alarm, and emotional distress,” he said.

“Capital Pride Alliance remains committed to ensuring that our events and community spaces are safe, welcoming, and free from harassment and we will continue to take appropriate steps to support and protect our community,” his statement says.

“I am happy with what we have accomplished so far,” Pasha told the Blade after the hearing.  “I’m just waiting to see what will happen next. But I want to reiterate this goes back to when someone treats you wrong you speak up,” he said. “Even if I lose this case, I am glad that I spoke up and raised concerns.”

He added, “I will just be confident that in the next couple of months the truth will come out. But for now, I am happy with the progress that we have made regarding this.”

This story will be updated when the judge issues his revised stay away order.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

U.S. Attorney’s Office fails to reinstate hate crime charge in anti-gay assault

Published

4 days ago

on

April 29, 2026

By

(Photo by chalabala/Bigstock)

The Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C., which prosecutes criminal cases in the District, has decided not to reinstate a hate crime designation filed by D.C. police against a man arrested in February for allegedly assaulting a gay man while using “homophobic slurs.”

After prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office initially dropped the hate crime designation filed by police shortly after the alleged attacker was arrested on Feb. 7, a spokesperson for the office told the Washington Blade the case was still under investigation, and additional charges could be filed.

“We continue to investigate this matter and make no mistake: should the evidence call for further charges, we will not hesitate to charge them,” a statement released by the office in February said. 

But D.C. Superior Court records show the case against defendant Dean Edmundson, 26, of Germantown, Md., who is now charged with Simple Assault without a hate crime designation, is scheduled to go to trial on Aug. 18.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office this week did not immediately respond to a message from the Blade asking why it chose not to reinstate the hate crime designation.

An affidavit in support of the arrest filed in court by D.C. police appears to support the charge of a hate crime designation. It says the incident occurred around 7:45 p.m. on Feb. 7 at the intersection of 14th and Q Streets, N.W., which is near two D.C. gay bars.

“The victim stated that they refused to High-Five Defendant Edmundson, which, upon that happening, Defendant Edmundson started walking behind both the victim and witness, calling the victim bald, ugly, and gay,” the arrest affidavit states.

“The victim stated that upon being called that, Defendant Edmundson pushed the victim with both hands, shoving them, causing the victim to feel the force of the push,” the affidavit says, adding, “The victim stated that they felt offended and that they were also gay.”     

Under D.C.’s Bias Related Crimes Act of 1989, penalties for crimes motivated by prejudice and hate against individuals based on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity disability, and homelessness can be enhanced by a judge upon conviction by one and a half times greater than the penalty of the underlying crime. 

Continue Reading

Popular