Connect with us

Local

Transcript of Madaleno’s speech

Gay Md. state official addresses colleagues Thursday on Senate floor

Published

on

Following are the remarks that Maryland State Sen. Richard Madaleno (D-Montgomery County), the only gay member of that body, delivered Thursday morning during the second day of debate on a bill that would allow gay and lesbian couples to marry in Maryland.

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you for your leadership for moving this forward and helping us to have, I think, a very dignified debate in the Senate.

I’m going to start for a moment to remember one of our former colleagues, Gwen Britt, who many of the people in this room served with either in the Senate or the House and to remind people that, in fact, Sen. Britt was going to be the initial sponsor of this bill in 2008 when we introduced it. And it was her untimely death of a heart attack just three days before we were scheduled to introduce this bill that we wound up having to change the sponsorship. Sen. Britt was dedicated to this issue. Sen. Britt’s husband, Travis, in fact, will be submitting testimony tomorrow to the House Judiciary Committee in support of this issue, as he has remained committed. And I didn’t want to have this moment go by without remembering Gwenn Britt and her many contributions to improve the lives in our state and in our country.

I want to thank all of you for this debate and I want to thank the people of Maryland for what I think has been a very reasoned debate about an issue that can be very emotional that does challenge a lot of the beliefs many people have. I certainly appreciate the journey that all of us have been on in the Senate.

You know, this bill is quite simple. It has two parts to it. It reiterates that no religious denomination will ever be required to recognize or perform or bless or celebrate any marriage that is against its beliefs. At the same time, it provides full equality under the law for thousands of same-gender couples in our state, couples like Mark and myself. Many of you know Mark. Many of you have gotten to know him over the years — my partner.

But even using that term partner sounds a little odd. You know, we had a church wedding in our faith. We had a church wedding 10 years ago. We stood with our minister in front of our friends, in front of our family, in front of our community and made a vow to the commitment to each other — the commitment to love each other, to honor, to occasionally obey — to live our lives together. He in my heart is my spouse, even though the laws in the State of Maryland do not say he is — he is my spouse in every sense of the word.

But to the law, he remains a legal stranger to me. He is my partner. I wouldn’t ask any of you to call your spouses your partner because that makes it sound as if he’s your business associate, that your spouse is your business associate and not the person you choose to spend your life with.

Without full and equal civil marriage Maryland makes sure that thousands of its families never forget that they are outsiders, that they are not quite equal. Our state and our nation were founded on principle of fairness and equality. These principles are timeless. Unfortunately, their application has not always been so. Yet every generation of Americans has held out their hand to someone who had been left out of this promise, held out their hand and brought them into our civil society, saying you are not the other, you are us.

That is what this moment is about today. It’s about embracing all of the families of our state.

A few years ago I had a chance to be going on a walk with my daughter. It was a nice spring day and she was picking the little weed flowers that grow — the dandelions, the butter cups, the little flowers that grow on front lawns of people who don’t have time to put weed killer down, right? So she was picking the little flowers that, you know, have the white seed pods. When you blow it the little seeds go flying away. And she handed me one of those flowers and said, “Daddy, will you hold my wishes for me?” I said, “Hold your wishes?” She said, “Yes, my teacher told me this is a wishing flower. When you blow on it you make a wish and you let the wishes fly.”

That to me, in essence, is what parenthood is about. It’s about holding that precious little flower and blowing and seeing it blossom in all sorts of unexpected ways. It is also, I think the extreme honor that we get as members of the legislature to hold those wishes, not just for our family or for ourselves, but for our community.

And there are many people in our state who are wishing for this, whose live will be improved, whose hopes will be realized, whose dreams will become true if we enact this. This will be a memorable day, a memorable day that will improve the lives of thousands of families around our state, thousands of families like my own.

Mr. President, I can’t tell you how much I can’t wait for this debate to end — not today — so I can go back, as my colleague from the 20th District talked about, I can go back to being the boring budget geek that he so kindly recognized me in the Washington Post as being. I can’t wait to get back to the issues that all Marylanders, whether they are straight or gay, black or white, Hispanic — the ones that they want us to work on — the one Maryland issue of jobs and growth, of moving our state forward.

This bill moves our state forward. Other legislation that we will have this year will move our state forward. I am so proud that in Maryland we, as we have from the beginning, look towards toleration and towards the future and embrace of a better future for us all. I urge everyone to consider casting a green vote on this bill. And I once again thank you for your leadership and for the time in the body.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Maryland

What Anne Arundel County school board candidates think about book bans

State lawmakers passed Freedom to Read Act in April

Published

on

Parents in some Maryland school districts have organized campaigns to restrict the kinds of books allowed in school libraries. (Photo by Kylie Cooper/Baltimore Banner)

BY ROYALE BONDS | Parents’ efforts to restrict content available to students in school libraries has become a contentious issue in Maryland. Conservative parent groups, such as Moms for Liberty, have been working to get books they believe are inappropriate removed from libraries in Carroll and Howard counties, sparking protests, new policies, and even a state law.

The Freedom to Read Act, passed in April, sets standards that books cannot be removed from public and school libraries due to an author’s background. Library staff that uphold the standard are protected under this act. The law, however, does not prohibit removing books deemed “sexually explicit,” the stated reason local Moms for Liberty chapters challenged school library books.

The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner website.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. Council member proposes change for Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs

Parker also seeks increased funding for LGBTQ programs in FY 2025 budget

Published

on

D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5) (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only LGBTQ member, has asked his fellow Council members to support a proposal to change the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs to become a “stand-alone entity outside the Executive Office of the Mayor to allow for greater transparency and accountability that reflects its evolution over the years.”

In an April 30 letter to each of his 12 fellow Council members, Parker said he plans to introduce an amendment to the city’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Support Act to make this change for the LGBTQ Affairs Office.

His letter also calls for adding to the city’s FY 2025 budget two specific funding proposals that local LGBTQ activists submitted to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser that the mayor did not include in her budget proposal submitted to the Council. One calls for $1.5 million to fund the completion of the build out and renovation for the D.C. Center for the LGBTQ Community’s new building in the city’s Shaw neighborhood and $300,000 in subsequent years to support the LGBTQ Center’s operations.

Parker’s second budget proposal calls for what he said was about $450,000 to fund 20 additional dedicated LGBTQ housing vouchers as part of the city’s existing program to provide emergency housing support for LGBTQ residents and other residents facing homelessness.

“The Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs currently manages about 90 vouchers across various programs and needs,” Parker said in his letter to fellow Council members. “Adding an additional 20 vouchers will cost roughly $450,000,” he wrote, adding that dedicated vouchers “play a crucial role in ensuring LGBTQ+ residents of the District can navigate the complex process of securing housing placements.”

In her proposed FY ’25 budget, Bowser calls for a 7.6 percent increase in funding for the Office of LGBTQ Affairs, which amounts to an increase of $132,000, bringing the office’s total funding to $1.7 million.

“To be clear, I support the strong work and current leadership of the Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs,” Parker says in his letter to fellow Council members. “This push for change is in recognition of the office’s notable achievements and the significant demands being placed on it, which require a greater level of accountability.”

Parker told the Blade in an April 30 telephone interview that he believes Japer Bowles, the current director of the Office of L|GBTQ Affairs is doing an excellent job in operating the office, but he believes the office would be able to do more for the LGBTQ community under the change he is proposing.

“Making it a stand-alone office versus it being clustered within the Community Affairs division of the mayor’s office, it will get more attention,” Parker told the Blade. “The leadership will have greater flexibility to advocate for the interest of LGBTQ residents, And we will be able to conduct greater oversight of the office,” he said, referring to the Council’s oversight process.

Parker noted that other community constituent offices in the mayor’s office, including the Office of Latino Affairs and the Office of Veterans Affairs are stand-alone offices that he hopes to bring about for the LGBTQ Affairs Office. He said Council member Brianne Nadeau, who chairs the Council committee that has oversight for the LGBTQ Affairs Office, has expressed support for his proposal.

Also expressing support for Parker’s proposal to make the LGBTQ Affairs Office a stand-alone office is the D.C. Advisory Neighborhood Commission Rainbow Caucus. Vincent Slatt, the caucus’s chairperson, submitted testimony last week before the D.C. Council Committee on Public Works and Operations, which is chaired by Nadeau, calling for making the LGBTQ Affairs Office a stand-alone office outside the Executive Office of the Mayor.

Slatt also stated in his testimony that the office has a “chronic staffing shortage” and recommended that at least three additional staff members be assigned to the office.

Daniel Gleick, the mayor’s press secretary, told the Blade the mayor’s office is reviewing Parker’s budget proposals, including the proposed change for the Office of LGBTQ Affairs.

But in testimony at a May 1, D.C. Council budget hearing before the Council’s Committee on Executive Administration and Labor, Lindsey Parker, Mayor Bowser’s Chief of Staff, appeared to express skepticism over making the LGBTQ Affairs office a stand-alone office. Lindsey Parker expressed her thoughts on the proposed change when asked about it by Councilmember Anita Bonds (D-At-Large), who chairs the committee that held the hearing.

“I would proffer that it doesn’t matter whether the agency is within the EOM [Executive Office of the Mayor] or not,” Lindsey Parker told Bonds. “They will still be reporting up into one would argue the most important agency in the D.C. government, which is the one that supports the mayor,” Lindsey Parker said. “So, it’s the closest to the mayor that you can get,” she said “So, you could pull it out and have a different budget chapter. I actually think that’s confusing and convoluted.”

Lindsey Parker added, “The Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs, with their six FTEs right now, if they were a stand-alone function they wouldn’t have all the non-personnel services in order to operate. They need to be under sort of the shop of the EOM in order to get those resources.” 

By FETs Lindsey Parker was referring to the term Full Time Equivalent employees.  

Continue Reading

Rehoboth Beach

Former CAMP Rehoboth official sentenced to nine months in prison

Salvator Seeley pleaded guilty to felony theft charge for embezzlement

Published

on

Salvator Seeley (Photo courtesy CAMP Rehoboth)

Salvator “Sal” Seeley, who served as an official with the Rehoboth Beach, Del., CAMP Rehoboth LGBTQ community center for 20 years, was sentenced on April 5 by a Sussex County Superior Court judge to nine months in prison and to pay $176,000 in restitution to the organization.

The sentencing took place about five weeks after Seeley pleaded guilty to a charge of Theft in Excess of $50,000 for allegedly embezzling funds from CAMP Rehoboth, a spokesperson for the Delaware Department of Justice told the Washington Blade.

Seeley’s guilty plea came shortly after a grand jury, at the request of prosecutors, indicted him on the felony theft charge following an investigation that found he had embezzled at least $176,000 from the nonprofit LGBTQ organization.

“Salvatore C. Seeley, between the 27th day of February 2019 and the 7th day of September 2021, in the County of Sussex, State of Delaware, did take property belonging to CAMP Rehoboth, Inc., consisting of United States currency and other miscellaneous property valued at more than $50,000, intending to appropriate the same,” the indictment states.

“The State recommended a sentence of two years of incarceration based on the large-scale theft and the impact to the non-profit organization,” Delaware Department of Justice spokesperson Caroline Harrison told the Blade in a statement.

“The defense cited Seeley’s lack of a record and gambling addiction in arguing for a probationary sentence,” the statement says. “Seeley was sentenced in Superior Court to a nine-month prison term and to pay a total of $176,000 in restitution for the stolen funds,” Harrison says in the statement.

Neither Seeley nor his attorney could immediately be reached for comment.

At the time of Seeley’s indictment in February, CAMP Rehoboth released a statement saying it first discovered “financial irregularities” within the organization on Sept. 7, 2021, “and took immediate action and notified state authorities.” The statement says this resulted in the investigation of Seeley by the state Department of Justice as well as an internal investigation by CAMP Rehoboth to review its “financial control policies” that led to an updating of those policies.

“As we have communicated from day one, CAMP Rehoboth has fully cooperated with law enforcement,” the statement continues. “At its request, we did not speak publicly about the investigation while it was ongoing for fear it would jeopardize its integrity,” according to the statement. “This was extremely difficult given our commitment to transparency with the community about day-to-day operations during the recent leadership transition.”

The statement was referring to Kim Leisey, who began her job as CAMP Rehoboth’s new executive director in July of 2023, while the Seeley investigation had yet to be completed, following the organization’s process of searching for a new director. It says Seeley left his job as Health and Wellness Director of CAMP Rehoboth in September of 2021 after working for the organization for more than 20 years.

“Mr. Seeley’s actions are a deep betrayal to not only CAMP Rehoboth but also the entire community we serve,” the statement says.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular