Local
Marriage bill stalled by ‘holdout’ lawmaker
O’Malley reiterates support, lobbies Md. delegates
Maryland House of Delegates member Tiffany Alston (D-Prince George’s County), one of two lawmakers who failed to show up for an expected committee vote Tuesday on a same-sex marriage bill, said she is now ready to vote on the bill, raising hope among supporters that the legislation would be approved by the committee late this week.
But Del. Jill Carter (D-Baltimore City), who joined Alston in boycotting the marriage bill vote as a means of promoting at least two unrelated bills stalled in the legislature, continued to withhold her vote on the marriage measure as of late Wednesday. Her action drew attention to the fragile coalition of lawmakers that LGBT advocates must rely on to enact same-sex marriage in Maryland.
Carter and Alston stunned backers of the Civil Marriage Protection Act on Tuesday morning by staying away from a meeting of the House Judiciary Committee in which a vote on the marriage bill was scheduled to take place, and announced they would not vote on the measure until Democratic leaders pay more attention to other issues they feel are equally important.
Both Carter and Alston are co-sponsors of the marriage bill. And due to the close division of committee members on the bill, their votes are needed to secure the committee’s approval of the bill to enable it to reach the House floor for a final vote.
Carter told the Baltimore Sun that Alston joined her in staying away from what had been expected to be a committee vote in favor of the same-sex marriage bill as a means of gaining “leverage” for other, unrelated issues such as restoring proposed cuts in school funding in their respective districts.
Backers of the Civil Marriage Protection Act have only enough support on the committee to pass the bill by a one-vote margin. Carter noted that it’s still relatively early in the legislative session and other bills, in addition to the marriage bill, should be placed on the fast track.
Meanwhile, Gov. Martin O’Malley reiterated his support on Tuesday for the marriage bill, repeating his commitment to sign it if it reaches his desk.
“The governor has committed to signing the bill,” said O’Malley spokesperson Shaun Adamec. “His personal support is for full equality for same-sex couples as is enjoyed by heterosexual couples. Regardless of the label the General Assembly puts on it, the governor’s objective is to achieve equality.”
Adamec said that O’Malley has been involved in lobbying for the marriage bill and has “made phone calls in support of the bill.” O’Malley has stopped short of saying he supports marriage equality. His lieutenant governor and attorney general have both publicly endorsed full marriage rights for same-sex couples.
Del. Joseph Vallario (D-Prince George’s County), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, responded to Carter and Alston’s ’protest’ action by rescheduling the vote on the marriage bill for later in the day on Tuesday, after the committee held a public hearing on as many as 16 other bills.
But at the end of the committee’s session, Carter made it known she was not ready to vote for the bill, even though she said she supports it. Vallario said he would assess the situation on Wednesday to determine when to schedule a vote on the marriage measure.
Del. Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City), a member of the committee who is gay, said Wednesday that Vallario tentatively set a committee voting session for Thursday afternoon. However, Clippinger said it was unclear whether the voting session would take place since Carter had yet to say whether she would attend.
Supporters of the marriage bill, which passed in the Maryland Senate last week, initially planned to hold off on a vote in the House until toward the end of the legislative session in April. But they moved up the vote to this week after determining a furious campaign against it by opponents might lead to the erosion of support.
Sen. Richard Madaleno (D-Montgomery County), the bill’s author and lead sponsor in the Senate, joined a spokesperson for the statewide LGBT group Equality Maryland in expressing confidence that the committee would soon approve the bill.
“I just think you see politics going on,” said Madaleno, who is gay. “It’s a high-profile issue and you’ve got some legislators who are supporters of the bill who still say they are supporting the bill who are just trying to bring attention to issues that they care about as well.”
He added, “I remain optimistic that we’re going to have the votes needed to pass it when it gets to the floor. Obviously, the first step is getting it through the committee. And we have the majority of the committee who are co-sponsors.”
Linsey Pecikonis, communications manager for Equality Maryland, said her group also remains confident that the committee will approve the bill.
“None of the delegates that have been supporting the bill in the past – none of them have wavered in their support,” Pecikonis said. “They just want to make sure that they are drawing attention and people are aware of other issues that are going on within the committee.”
Madaleno noted that opponents of the bill would seize on the wrinkle that surfaced in the House Tuesday to advance their claim that support for the bill is eroding.
“I think that just speaks to what we have to do, and that is, do the same thing — pull out all the stops,” he said. “No one should take anyone for granted in this debate. People should be calling their delegates and asking them to vote for the bill.”
Maryland
What Anne Arundel County school board candidates think about book bans
State lawmakers passed Freedom to Read Act in April
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.
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
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.
Rehoboth Beach
Former CAMP Rehoboth official sentenced to nine months in prison
Salvator Seeley pleaded guilty to felony theft charge for embezzlement
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.
Pride journey: Las Vegas
Unique financial planning challenges for trans community
Heather Lawver’s journey to growth, inclusion with Ceemo.ai at StartOut’s Growth Lab
Indian election heats up
Judy Shepard to receive Presidential Medal of Freedom
HHS reverses Trump-era anti-LGBTQ rule
4th Circuit rules gender identity is a protected characteristic
Pride season has begun
New World Bank US executive director: LGBTQ rights are human rights
