When Nic Kelly finishes her 6 a.m. shift as a manager at PetSmart, she walks to her bartending job at Alamo Drafthouse in Crystal City to serve cocktails, beers, and milkshakes for hundreds of guests.

Kelly, 26, doesn’t work a combined 60-65 hours per week to pocket extra cash –– she does it to barely make her almost $1,700 rent each month.

“I’m constantly working, and some days I work two jobs in the same day,” Kelly said. “But twice now I’ve had to borrow money from my mother just to make sure I pay my full rent.”

Yesim Sayin, D.C. Policy Center executive director, said this is unfortunately how the D.C. area is structured –– to keep essential workers, service employees, and lower-income people out and those with greater economic mobility in.

The DMV area’s high cost of living makes it near-impossible for employees who keep the area running to make a living, Sayin said. In 2022, only 36% of D.C.’s essential workers lived in the city, according to a D.C. Policy Center report. D.C. is also ranked 13th in the world for highest cost of living as of Nov. 7.

But for Sayin, there’s more work for policymakers to get done than simply acknowledging the high cost of living. Take a look at how current policies are impacting residents, and what long-term solutions could help the DMV thrive.

Feeling the high cost of living 

D.C. has the highest unemployment rate in the country at 6.0% as of August. Sayin said the city’s high unemployment rate reflects a lack of geographic mobility in its population, meaning those who can’t find jobs can’t afford to look outside of the DMV area.

Though there are job training groups working to close the unemployment  gap, securing a job –– let alone two –– rarely guarantees a comfortable lifestyle for essential and service employees.

A single-person household in D.C. with no children must make at least $25.98 an hour to support themselves, according to the Living Wage Calculator. That number jumps to $51.68 an hour for a single adult with one child. Minimum wage in D.C. is $17.95 an hour and $10 an hour for tipped employees.

Whether it’s utilizing free meals at the Alamo to save on groceries or borrowing money to make rent, every week could bring a different sacrifice for Kelly. 

While Kelly lives and works a few minutes south of D.C., Sayin said the connectedness of the DMV means you don’t have to travel far to feel the withering effects of the area’s high cost of living.

“People don’t really care what flag adorns their skies,” Sayin said. “They’re looking for good housing, good schools, cheaper cost of living, and ease of transportation.”

For those that stay in the DMV area, those conditions are hard to come by. This can lead to people working multiple jobs or turning to gigs, such as Uber driving or selling on Etsy, to fill income gaps. Sayin said there are short-term benefits to securing these gigs alongside a primary job, such as helping people weather economic storms, avoid going on government assistance or racking up debt.

But she said the long-term implications of relying on gigs or other jobs can harm someone’s professional aspirations.

“You can spend three extra hours on your own profession every work week, or you can spend three hours driving Uber. One gives you cash, but the other gives you perhaps a different path in your professional life,” Sayin said. “And then 20 years from now, you could be making much more with those additional investments in yourself professionally.” 

There’s a strong demand for work in D.C., but when the city starts suffering economically, those who live outside the area –– usually essential or remote workers –– will likely find work elsewhere. Sayin said this negatively impacts those employees’ quality of life, giving them less professional tenure and stability.

D.C.’s cost of living also centralizes power in the city, according to Sayin. When lower-wage employees are priced out, the residents who make up the city don’t always reflect the ones who keep it running. 

“Ask your Amazon, Uber or FedEx driver where they live. They’re somewhere in Waldorf. They’re not here,” Sayin said.

Working toward an accessible D.C.

Build more. That’s what Sayin said when thinking of ways to solve D.C.’s affordability crisis.

But it’s not just about building more –– it’s about building smartly and utilizing the space of the city more strategically, Sayin said.

While D.C. has constructed lots of new housing over the years, Sayin noted that they were mostly built in a handful of neighborhoods tailored to middle and upper-class people such as The Wharf. Similarly, building trendy small units to house young professionals moving to the city take up prime real estate from struggling families that have much less geographic mobility, she said.

“The affordability problem is that today’s stock is yesterday’s construction,” Sayin said.

Solving these issues includes ushering in a modern perspective on outdated policies. Sayin cited a D.C. policy that places restrictions on childcare centers built on second floors. Since D.C. parents pay the highest rates in the country for childcare at $47,174 annually, she said loosening unnecessary restrictions could help fuel supply and lower costs for families.

Sayin said policymakers need to consider the economic challenges facing residents today, and whether the incentives and tradeoffs of living in D.C. are valuable enough to keep them in the city.

For Kelly, the incentives and tradeoffs of staying in the DMV area aren’t enough. She’s considered moving back in with her mom a few times given how much she has to work just to get by.

Aside from wanting higher compensation for the work she does –– she noted that businesses can’t operate without employees like her –– Kelly also questioned the value of the tradeoff of moving so close to the city.

“There’s no reason why I’m paying $1,700 for a little studio,” Kelly said. “You also have to pay for parking, utilities aren’t included and a lot of residents have to pay for amenities. We are just giving these property management companies so much money, and we’re not really seeing a whole lot of benefit from it.”

Sayin said placing value on the working people of the city will inject fresh life into D.C.’s economy. Without a valuable tradeoff for living in or around the city, there’s little keeping essential and service employees from staying and doing work taken for granted by policymakers. 

LGBTQ activist and businessman Joshua Patel hosted a community Diwali party on Nov. 9.

Patel organized the event as a community gathering amid the Trump-Vance administration’s policies against LGBTQ inclusion and DEI. The event, held at the Capo Deli speakeasy, drew more than 120 attendees, including local business leaders.

Patel is a franchise owner of ProMD Health, recently awarded as the best med spa by the Washington Blade. He is also a major gift officer at Lambda Legal.

Patel noted that upon moving from New York to Washington in 2022, he desired a chance for community-based Diwali celebrations. He stated that the city offered minimal chances for gatherings beyond religious institutions, unless one was invited to the White House’s Diwali party. 

“With our current administration, that gathering too has ended — where we cannot expect more than Kash Patel and President Trump lighting a ‘diya’ candle on Instagram while simultaneously cutting DEIB funding,” Patel said.

In addition to celebrating the festival of lights and good over evil, Patel saw the event as a moment to showcase “rich, vibrant culture” and “express gratitude.”

Patel coined the celebration a “unifier.”

“From a spiritual angle, Shiva was the world’s first transgender God, taking the form of both “male” and “female” incarnations,” Patel said. “The symbolism of our faith and concepts are universal and allows for all to rejoice in the festivities as much or little as they desire.”

Savor Soiree, DMV Mini Snacks and Capo Deli catered the event. DJ Kush spun music and Elisaz Events decorated the Diwali celebration.

The Diwali party also featured performances by former Miss Maryland Heather Young Schleicher, actor Hariqbal Basi, Patel himself and Salatin Tavakoly and Haseeb Ahsan.

Capital Pride Alliance, the D.C.-based LGBTQ group that organizes the city’s annual Pride events, filed a Civil Complaint on Oct. 27 against local LGBTQ activist and former volunteer Darren Pasha, accusing him of engaging in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk Capital Pride’s staff, board members, and volunteers.

The complaint, which was filed in D.C. Superior Court, was accompanied by a separate motion seeking a court restraining order, preliminary injunction and anti-stalking order prohibiting Pasha from “any further contact, harassment, intimidation, or interference with the Plaintiff, its staff, board members, volunteers, and affiliates.”

According to online court records, on Oct. 28, a judge issued an “initial order” setting the date for a scheduling conference for the case on Feb. 6, 2026. As of the end of the business day on Friday, Nov. 7, the judge did not issue a ruling on Capital Pride’s request for an injunction and restraining order

The court records show that on Nov. 5 Pasha filed an answer to the complaint in which he denies all allegations that he targeted Capital Pride officials or volunteers for stalking or that he engaged in any other improper behavior.

“It is evident that the document is replete with false, misleading, and unsubstantiated assertions,” Pasha says in his response, adding that “no credible or admissible evidence has been provided” to meet the statutory requirements for an anti-stalking order.

The Capital Pride complaint includes an 18-page legal brief outlining its allegations against Pasha and an additional 167-page addendum of “supporting exhibits” that includes multiple statements by witnesses whose names are blacked out in the court filing documents.

“Over the past year, Defendant Darren Dolshad Pasha (“DSP”} has engaged in a sustained and escalating course of conduct directed at CPA, including repeated and unwanted contact, harassment, intimidation, threats, manipulation, and coercive behavior targeting CPA staff, board members, volunteers, and affiliates,” the Capital Pride complaint states.

It continues, “This conduct included physical intimidation, unwanted physical contact, deception to gain unauthorized access to events, retaliatory threats, abusive digital communication, proxy-based harassment, and knowing defiance of organizational bans and protective orders.”

The sweeping anti-stalking order requested in Capital Pride’s court motion would prohibit Pasha from interacting in person or online or electronically with “all current and future staff, board members, and volunteers of Capital Pride Alliance, Inc.”

The proposed order adds, the “defendant shall stay at least 200 yards away from the principal offices of Capital Pride Alliance” and “shall stay at least 200 yards away from all Capital Pride Alliance events, event venues, associated activities, and affiliated gatherings.”

The reason for these restrictions, according to the complaint, is that Pasha’s actions toward Capital Pride staff, board members, and volunteers allegedly reached the level of causing them to fear for their safety, become “alarmed, disturbed, or frightened,” or suffer emotional distress as defined in D.C.’s anti-stalking law.

Among the Capital Pride officials who are identified by name and who have included statements in the complaint in support of its allegations against Pasha are Ashley Smith, the former Capital Pride Alliance board president, and June Crenshaw, the Capital Pride Alliance deputy director.

“I am making this declaration based on my personal knowledge to support CPA’s petition for a Civil Anti-Stalking Order (ASO) against Daren Pasha,” Smith says in his court statement. “My concerns about the respondent are based on my personal interactions with him as well as reports I have received from other members of the CPA community,” Smith states.

The Capital Pride complaint against Pasha and its supporting documents were filed by D.C. attorney Nick Harrison of the local law firm Harrison-Stein PC.

In his 16-page response to the complaint that he says he wrote himself without the aid of an attorney, Pasha says the Capital Pride complaint against him appears to be a form of retaliation against him for a dispute he has had with the organization and its then president, Ashley Smith, over the past year.

His response states that the announcement last month by Capital Pride that Smith resigned from his position as board president on Oct. 18 after it became aware of a “claim” regarding Smith and it had opened an investigation into the claim supports his assertion that Smith’s resignation is linked to his year-long claim that Smith tarnished his reputation.

Among his allegations against Smith in his response to the Capital Pride complaint, Pasha accuses Smith of using his position as a member of the board of the Human Rights Campaign, the D.C.-based national LGBTQ advocacy organization, to persuade HRC to terminate his position as an HRC volunteer and to ban him from attending any future HRC events. He attributes HRC’s action against him to “defamatory” claims about him by Smith related to his ongoing dispute with Smith.

The Capital Pride complaint cites HRC officials as saying Pasha was ousted from his role as a volunteer after he allegedly engaged in abusive and inappropriate behavior  toward HRC staff members and other volunteers.

 Capital Pride has so far declined to disclose the reason for Smith’s resignation pending an internal investigation. 

In its statement announcing Smith’s resignation, a copy of which it sent to the Washington Blade, Capital Pride Alliance says, “Recently, CPA was made aware of a claim made regarding him. The organization has retained an independent firm to initiate an investigation and has taken the necessary steps to make available partner service providers for the parties involved.”

The statement adds, “To protect the integrity of the process and the privacy of all involved, CPA will not be sharing further information at this time.”

Smith did not respond to a request by the Blade for comment, and Capital Pride has declined to disclose whether Smith’s resignation is linked in any way to Pasha’s allegations. 

The Capital Pride complaint seeks to “characterize me as posing a threat sufficient to justify the issuance of a Civil Anti-Stalking Order (CAO), yet no credible or admissible evidence has been provided to satisfy the statutory elements required under D.C. Code 22-3133,” Pasha states in his response.

“CPA’s assertions fail to establish any such conduct on my part and instead appear calculated to discredit and retaliate against me for raising legitimate concerns regarding the conduct of its former Board President,” he states in his response.

In its complaint against Pasha and its legal memorandum supporting its request for an anti-stalking order, Capital Pride provides a list of D.C. Superior Court records that show Pasha has been hit with several anti-stalking orders in cases unrelated to Capital Pride in the past and has violated those orders, resulting in his arrest in at least two of those cases.

“A fundamental justification for granting the [Anti-Stalking Order] lies in the Respondent’s extensive and recent criminal history demonstrating a proven propensity for defying judicial protective measures,” the complaint states. “This history suggests that organizational bans alone are insufficient to deter his behavior, elevating the current situation to one requiring mandatory judicial enforcement,” it says.

“It is alleged that in or about June 2025, Defendant was convicted on multiple counts of violating existing Anti-Stalking Orders in matters unrelated to Capital Pride Alliance (“CPA”),with consecutive sentences imposed, purportedly establishing a pattern of contempt for judicial restraint,” Pasha states in his court response to the Capital Pride complaint.

“These allegations are irrelevant to the matter currently before the Court,” his response continues. “The events cited are entirely unrelated to CPA and the allegations underlying the petition for a Civil Anti-Stalking Order. Moreover, each of these prior matters has been fully adjudicated, resolved, and dismissed, and therefore cannot serve as a basis to justify the issuance of a permanent Civil Anti-Stalking Order in this unrelated proceeding.”

He adds in his response, “Any reliance on such prior matters is misleading, prejudicial, and legally insufficient.”