District of Columbia
Casa Ruby receiver appeals decision dismissing lawsuit against former board
Case against founder Ruby Corado continues
The Wanda Alston Foundation, which assumed control over the operations of the D.C. LGBTQ community services group Casa Ruby in August 2022 under a court appointed receivership role, last week filed papers before the D.C. Court of Appeals contesting a May 1, 2023, decision by a D.C. Superior Court judge dismissing a lawsuit against seven of the eight former Casa Ruby board members who the Alston Foundation named as defendants.
The lawsuit, which the Alston Foundation filed Dec. 23, 2022, accuses all eight former Casa Ruby board members of violating D.C.’s nonprofit corporation law by failing to “hold regular meetings and/or maintain official records – thereby exercising no oversight or governance over the organization.”
The lawsuit also names Casa Ruby founder and former executive director Ruby Corado as a defendant who it says is also responsible for Casa Ruby’s downfall.
The Alston Foundation’s lawsuit followed a separate civil complaint filed against Casa Ruby in July 2022 by the Office of the D.C. Attorney General, which alleges that Casa Ruby, under Corado’s leadership, violated the city’s Nonprofit Corporations Act in connection with its financial dealings, including Corado’s alleged unauthorized withdrawal of funds from Casa Ruby.
In a report it released last year, the Alston Foundation said its own investigation into Casa Ruby’s financial records show that Corado allegedly embezzled over $800,000 from the organization, with the board failing to take steps to prevent that from happening.
Corado has denied the allegations against her, saying her withdrawal of funds from Casa Ruby accounts, some of which she said was for her establishing a Casa Ruby outpost in El Salvador, were all approved by the board.
The lawsuit calls on the court to require Corado and the former board members to pay “restitution, compensatory damages, punitive damages, receivership fees and expenses, court costs, attorneys’ fees and expenses, and any other relief the court deems necessary and proper.”
In her May 2023 decision, D.C. Superior Court Judge Danya A. Dayson dismissed the lawsuit against seven of the eight former Casa Ruby board members but did not dismiss the case against Corado. The judge also did not dismiss the case against former board member Consuella Lopez, citing evidence presented in the lawsuit that Lopez received some financial benefits from Corado.
Lopez didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment by the Washington Blade. The other board members have declined requests for comment at the time the lawsuit was filed.
Dayson states in her decision that her dismissal of the lawsuit against the seven board members was based on her interpretation of a D.C. law that says members of an organization’s board of directors can only be held liable for harming an organization like Casa Ruby if they “intentionally, rather than negligently, inflicted harm on Casa Ruby.”
The judge states in her ruling that the law in question also says board members can be held responsible for harming an organization if a “board member intentionally violated a criminal law or that the board member received some amount of money to which they were not entitled.” Dayson states in her ruling that the Alston Foundation lawsuit does not provide sufficient evidence that the seven board members committed those types of violations.
Attorneys with the D.C. law firm Wiley Rein LLP, who are representing the Alston Foundation, dispute the judge’s interpretation of the law. They argue in a 23-page legal brief filed with the D.C. Court of Appeals on Feb. 26 that the Alston Foundation’s Third Interim Report in its role as the Casa Ruby receiver provides sufficient evidence that the former board members are legally liable for harming Casa Ruby.
Their legal brief says based on that report, among other evidence, the court could find that the former board members “were deliberately indifferent or ‘willfully blind’ to the alleged wrongful conduct of the non-profit’s executive director amounting to actual knowledge on their part that inaction would harm the non-profit, ultimately and forcibly leading to its financial inability to continue operating.”
The brief adds that if the judge’s dismissal ruling is upheld, it would have an adverse impact on other nonprofit organizations whose board members fail to adequately oversee the organizations.
“If the Superior Court’s order is allowed to stand, directors could both abdicate these responsibilities and claim not to know that such addiction would have adverse consequences for their organizations with impunity,” it says. “Indeed, such a standard essentially provides non-profit directors with an incentive to engage in a ‘see-no-evil’ hands off approach to their responsibilities under circumstances in which the Nonprofit Corporations Act expressly contemplates the opposite.”
Under court rules, the former board members will be given an opportunity through their attorneys to file a response objecting to the Alston Foundation’s appeal of the dismissal ruling.
District of Columbia
Former Capital Pride board member reiterates sexual harassment allegation
Trans activist says resignation of board chair won’t change org’s culture
Taylor Lianne Chandler, who earlier this year resigned from the Capital Pride Alliance Board of Directors after expressing concern that the board failed to address instances of “sexual misconduct” within the Capital Pride organization, said this week she doesn’t believe her concerns will be addressed following the resignation of the board’s current chairperson.
Capital Pride Alliance serves as the lead organizer of D.C.’s annual LGBTQ Pride events.
Anna Jinkerson, who has served as chair of the Capital Pride board for only 10 months and has served on the board for the past four years, confirmed she is resigning from the board effective Sept. 30.
In a statement to the Washington Blade commenting on the possible impact of Jinkerson’s resignation, Chandler said Capital Pride board member Natalie Thompson would be replacing Jinkerson as board chair, and she didn’t expect that change to impact what she called Capital Pride’s problematic “culture.”
But Ryan Bos, the Capital Pride president and CEO, told the Blade that Thompson had not been selected as the new board chair and that a new chair would not be selected until the board holds an election scheduled for October.
Chandler, who identifies as transgender, said it was a Capital Pride board member who told her that Natalie Thompson had been or would be selected as the new Capital Pride board chair. She didn’t identify the board member.
“My concerns about how Capital Pride has handled serious allegations of sexual misconduct have not disappeared with a change in leadership,” she told the Blade in her statement. “When leadership continues to socialize, smile for photographs, and share spaces with someone facing serious allegations, what message does that send to the people who say they were harmed,” she said.
Chandler has told the Blade a Capital Pride investigation identified an individual implicated in a “pattern” of sexual harassment-related behavior but said she was bound by a Non-Disclosure Agreement that applied to all board members and she could not provide further details.
When asked by the Blade to comment on Chandler’s allegations at the time she resigned from the board in February of this year, board chair Jinkerson said Capital Pride acts “quickly and appropriately” to address concerns such as those raised by Chandler. But she and other Capital Pride officials did not at that time or since then specifically acknowledge whether someone associated with the organization engaged in sexual harassment.
“The community deserves transparency, accountability, and leadership willing to make difficult decisions,” Chandler said in her statement to the Blade this week. “Changing the chair doesn’t change the culture,” she added. “Actions do.”
In response to a request from the Blade for an update on its response to Chandler’s allegations about alleged sexual misconduct within the Capital Pride organization, Bos sent the Blade a statement on behalf of Capital Pride.
“The Capital Pride Alliance takes allegations of harassment, misconduct, and unsafe behavior seriously,” the statement says. “The organization follows standard procedures and engages appropriate resources to support a thorough, confidential, and impartial review, when information is reported.”
The statement adds, ”Because these matters require maintaining confidentiality and protecting the privacy of personnel, volunteers, and governance processes, we will not comment on specific individuals, allegations, investigative findings or communications involving law enforcement.”
It concludes by stating, “We remain committed to fostering a safe, respectful, and inclusive environment, appropriately addressing concerns raised, and continuing to strengthen our policies, governance practices, and organizational culture.”
Although the statement refers to “communications involving law enforcement,” Capital Pride has not disclosed whether instances of alleged sexual harassment or, as stated by Chandler, a possible instance of sexual assault, have been reported to D.C. police.
A D.C. police spokesperson, in response to a Blade inquiry, said they have no record of a sexual harassment or sexual assault complaint surfacing from the Capital Pride office, which is located in the D.C. LGBTQ+ Community Center building at 1827 Wiltberger Street, N.W.
Officials at Capital Pride recently exchanged testy public Facebook posts with Chandler. June Crenshaw, COO of Capital Pride Alliance, criticized Chandler for her social media posts on the matter.
“It is remarkable to watch people publicly accuse others of failing to create safe spaces when, during the time they themselves held positions of leadership and significant volunteer responsibility, they claim to have witnessed deeply troubling behavior, yet never reported what they allegedly witnessed to fellow leaders, law enforcement, the Office of the Attorney General, legal counsel, or staff responsible for addressing such concerns,” Crenshaw wrote. “When I became aware of allegations or personally witnessed conduct that required intervention, I reported what I knew through the appropriate channels, including to law enforcement and other relevant authorities. Investigations were conducted. Those processes created records, documentation, correspondence, timelines, and conclusions.”
Chandler responded, “I was NOT in organizational leadership or fully informed about the scope of these allegations when much of what you reference occurred. I was read into the situation after becoming an executive officer. By that point, the investigation had already concluded, and we were awaiting the final report. … Once that report became available to me, and once I understood the seriousness and scope of what was being alleged, my position was anything but ambiguous: I did not believe this individual should be welcomed at, participate in, or have access to official Pride events.”
Capital Pride’s attorney Nick Harrison then joined the exchange, accusing Chandler of violating confidentiality rules.
“You served on the Board for years. You cannot now present yourself as an outsider with no responsibility for what occurred during your tenure,” Harrison wrote. “When the situation became difficult, you resigned, provided your resignation letter to the media, disclosed confidential organizational matters, and recast yourself as the victim.”
Again, no one has publicly identified the person Chandler references as being welcome at Pride events and photographed with Capital Pride leadership.
District of Columbia
Center for Black Equity’s annual gala to take place Oct. 3
Advocacy group to honor Black LGBTQ community champions
The Center for Black Equity, the D.C.-based international network of LGBTQ activists and organizations that advocate for Black LGBTQ communities and organize Black Pride events worldwide, will hold its annual 2026 BE Gala in D.C. on Oct. 3.
The event, to be held at the Conrad Washington Hotel at 950 New York Ave., N.W., among other things, will honor at least a dozen “distinguished Black individuals” and organizations that champion Black LGBTQ communities, according to a statement released by the Center for Black Equity.
“The honorees will receive awards recognizing extraordinary leadership, advocacy, and service across civil rights, public health, the arts, media, entrepreneurship, and community life,” the statement says.
“With an elegant atmosphere and a bold mission, this unforgettable evening brings together advocates, allies, and change makers committed to equity and joy,” the statement says in referring to the Oct. 3 BE Gala.
The statement notes that tickets for the event, which serves as a fundraiser for the Center of Black Equity, begin at $250 for individuals and include dinner and two drinks. It says reserved tables for eight were being offered for $2,000, and “Premier” tables for eight were selling for $2,500 and include seating near the stage.
“The BE Gala is more than an evening of celebration,” according to the statement. “It is an opportunity to honor Black LGBTQ+ leadership while investing in the work of the Center for Black Equity.”
Kenya Hutton, the Center for Black Equity’s CEO, told the Washington Blade the name “BE” for the gala is not an acronym. “The name is rooted in the idea of being: being seen, being celebrated and being fully and authentically yourself,” he said.
“BE Gala creates a space to celebrate Black LGGTQ+ people for who they are, the lives they lead and the impact they make,” he added.
The Center for Black Equity until 2012 was called the International Federation of Black Prides and was founded by organizers of D.C.’s Black Pride celebration.
Its current website includes a statement saying it’s mission is to “promote a multinational LGBTQ+ network dedicated to improving health and wellness opportunities, economic empowerment, and equal rights while promoting individua and collective work, responsibilities, and self-empowerment.”
The 2026 Center for Black Equity award honorees as announced in its statement released this week are:
Courtney Snowden: Welmore Cook Advocacy & Service Award
Clover Barnes: Ernest Hopkins Public Health Leadership Award
Nikki Alexander: Unsung Hero Award
Darryl G. Moore: Center for Black Equity Leadership Award
The Freelux Project: Center for Black Equity Small Business Award
Tori Cooper: Earline Budd Transgender Leadership Award
Bishop Steven R. Sawyer: Bishop Kwabena Rainey Cheeks Spiritual & Community Leadership Award
Rev. Carmarion D. Anderson-Harvey: Bishop Kwabena Rainey Cheeks Spiritual & Community Leadership Award
Monroe Alise: Trans Power in Media Award
Justin N. Stewart: National Black Pride Image Award
Marlene McNeese: Curtis L. Etherly Jr. Ally Award
Venton Jones: Eleanor Holmes Norton Civil Rights & Justice Award
In Our Own Voices, Inc.: Ruth Ellis Community Impact Award
District of Columbia
Being a female firefighter comes with unique risks, and rewards
Well-fitting gear can be a safety issue
Firefighters are known for running into danger to save lives, but they may face another danger after the fire is out. Studies on firefighter health point to rising concerns about cancer risk, mental health struggles, and exposure to toxic “forever chemicals” found in firefighting foam and protective gear.
Nearly 40 percent of firefighters report “clinically significant levels” of anxiety or depression and 10 percent report this level of posttraumatic stress disorder, according to a national survey of public safety workers published last year in the journal Psychological Services. Lawmakers from several states are also pushing for stronger federal protections and compensation for firefighters exposed to hazardous chemicals on the job.
Female firefighters can also face a higher risk of injury, heat-related illness, and even greater carcinogen exposure due to ill-fitting equipment that wasn’t designed for their bodies. Their risk of psychological and workplace stress is higher, as well, due in part to the isolation of being in a slim minority in fire departments across the country. Only 5 to 9 percent of firefighters are women.
To understand the risks and rewards of being a female firefighter, Youthcast Media Group interviewed Connie Reid, a firefighter with the DC Fire and EMS Department. Meredith McQuerry, an associate professor of textile science at Florida State University who studies how to improve firefighting gear and other personal protective equipment to better protect women in the fire service, also responded to student questions via email. Reid’s and McQuerry’s responses have been edited for clarity and length.
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN IN YOUR CAREER, AND WHAT DREW YOU TO IT?
REID: I’ve been a firefighter for seven years. I wasn’t sure if I wanted to be a firefighter or police officer, but I do have uncles that were firefighters, so I leaned towards the firefighter side. So I’m happy I made that decision.
McQUEERY: During my PhD, a colleague and I realized we never saw any female firefighters come through our research center. We began looking in the literature and found very few studies focused on PPE for women in the fire service.
DOES FIREFIGHTING GEAR ACTUALLY FIT WOMEN, AND DOES IT MATTER?
REID: In D.C., if you have an issue, you just send an email, and we have people who will properly size us. I don’t think any female that I know has complained about gear not fitting.
McQUERRY: Wearing protective clothing designed for the opposite sex can lead to restricted mobility, greater opportunity for thermal and particulate exposure, and a lack of functionality that can mean life or death, such as accessing a tool in a pocket that is completely closed off due to anthropometric differences.
There is a culture in the fire service, and especially for women in a male-dominated field, that suppresses the likelihood of advocating for better-fitting gear. While not within our area of expertise, we have done our best to raise awareness for the need for properly fitting gear for women in the fire service and to champion their self-advocacy.
Female firefighters report the inability to throw a ladder, step onto the truck, or cinch their pants down adequately due to ill-fitting protective clothing and equipment. One example is the interference between the helmet and the self-contained breathing apparatus which prevents many female firefighters from looking upward to throw a ladder without first twisting their neck sideways to avoid the lid of the helmet knocking into the respirator bottle. This type of modification can lead to acute and long term injury.
ARE THESE PROBLEMS MOSTLY ABOUT COMFORT? WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF SAFETY RISKS OR DANGERS THAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN GEAR DOES NOT FIT PROPERLY?
McQUERRY: All firefighters need properly fitting PPE as the primary threats center around carcinogen exposure, musculoskeletal injuries, and heat-related illnesses. For example, you have to work harder to do the same task in ill-fitting, mobility restrictive gear, which leads to faster metabolic heat production and build-up in the suit, quickening the onset of fatigue and other HRI.
Our previous work led us to hypothesize that oversized gear for women allowed for more particulate ingress in the interface areas including the collar/hood, sleeve/glove, boot/pant, and coat/pant areas. A recently funded study is allowing us to quantify this by correlating the gear fit of women’s structural turnout gear with their cancer biomarkers collected via urinalysis pre- and post-live fire burns.
HOW DO FIREFIGHTERS TRAIN TO STAY SAFE DURING DANGEROUS SITUATIONS?
REID: So we have trainings all the time. Safety is the number one priority of the job. They make sure they let us know all the time. We have annual trainings. We have quarterly trainings. We have online training if you need refreshers.
We are both on a medical side and a fire side so as a D.C. firefighter, you come in, and they teach you. You bring a positive attitude and just determination, because some people really don’t understand it’s not just physical, it’s mental. You have to be mentally prepared.
WERE THERE ANY FINDINGS IN YOUR RESEARCH THAT SURPRISED YOU?
McQUEERY: Yes, we were surprised to find in our nationwide survey [of 2,000 people] a few years ago that 15 percent of U.S. structural and 21 percent of wildland female firefighters sometimes or always leave off an essential item of their PPE due to limited mobility. Specifically, the turnout coat and pants or wildland shirt and pants were the most noted for being intentionally not worn, which is very surprising and concerning.
HAVE FIRE DEPARTMENTS OR EQUIPMENT COMPANIES STARTED MAKING IMPROVEMENTS SINCE YOUR STUDY, AND IF SO, WHY DO YOU THINK FIREFIGHTING EQUIPMENT HAS TAKEN SO LONG TO ADAPT TO WOMEN FIREFIGHTERS?
McQUEERY: It wasn’t until the post-Me Too movement that our research in this area was able to gain traction and support. It is a decades (or centuries) old problem of there not being enough “market share” for the 5-11 percent of the fire service. However, we have seen tremendous growth and innovation in this area since we began our funded research in 2019. Now, nearly every single structural firefighting manufacturer offers women’s protective clothing.
When we began this research, only two manufacturers offered women’s turnout gear. Now, to our knowledge, all but one [seven out of eight] does, which is a significant advancement across the industry. There is still much work to do in fine tuning these designs to fit the specific anthropometrics of female firefighters.
DO YOU WORRY ABOUT THE LONG TERM EFFECTS OF BEING A FIREFIGHTER?
REID: Do I worry? I wouldn’t say worry. I’m more mindful of it, because the material of today is different from years ago. It burns faster, and then there’s more chemically made things than like natural resources. So I’m aware of that. They also have training teaching us about things like that. And there’s smoke exposures, there’s a health risk like sleep deprivation or sleep disruption.
WHAT KIND OF EDUCATION OR TRAINING DO YOU NEED TO BECOME A FIREFIGHTER?
REID: So there’s a few routes to get onto the job. The cadet route would be … you have to be 18 to 21 years old, you have to be a D.C. resident, have a high school diploma from a D.C. school (public or private), or have a GED, and you have to have at least a learner’s permit at the time that you are applying for the job. To be a recruit, you have to be at least 18 years old, have a full driver’s license, (not just a permit), and you also have to have a high school diploma or GED. The third way [is as] a paramedic, and you have to come on the job with your paramedic license.
WHAT’S YOUR ADVICE FOR YOUNG WOMEN CONSIDERING THIS PATH?
REID: I would say, welcome. Come on the job. We need females. I always think it’s awesome when we get young ladies that are interested in the fire side. A lot of females just only want to do EMS. There’s nothing against EMS, but the fire side is pretty cool, too. Don’t sell yourself short, just try to do both of them. It’s a very rewarding job. You have to also mentally prepare yourself and physically prepare yourself. But I think the job is a great experience. I wish I would have started younger myself.
Mariyah Matthews is in the class of 2027 at Bard High School Early College DC, one of Youthcast Media Group’s journalism class partners. Sarah Gandluri is a YMG intern who is studying political science and global studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
