Living
Orange wins race for at-large Council seat
Mara, Weaver capture ‘gay’ precincts
Democrat Vincent Orange won the race for an at-large D.C. Council seat in the city’s special election on Tuesday, defeating eight rivals, including interim Democratic Council member Sekou Biddle, who received the backing of most LGBT leaders.
In a development that suggests rank-and-file LGBT voters may have rejected the advice of gay leaders, Biddle lost by lopsided margins to pro-gay Republican Patrick Mara in seven of the city’s 14 precincts identified as having high concentrations of LGBT residents.
Pro-gay Democratic candidate Bryan Weaver trounced Biddle in another five of those precincts in neighborhoods in Ward 1, which is Weaver’s home base. Orange won in the remaining two precincts — in Anacostia and the Southwest Waterfront — which are believed to have a significant number of black LGBT residents.
Gay activist Bob Summersgill, a former president of the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance, said the small voter turnout in the election of slightly more than 12 percent of the city’s registered voters makes it difficult to draw conclusions about the LGBT vote.
“With a dismally low turnout, I don’t think there was a gay bloc of voters,” he said. “Most of the candidates were lackluster on our issues and were closely grouped in the mediocre range.”
Summersgill was referring to GLAA’s ratings of the candidates.
Robert Turner, president of Log Cabin Republicans of D.C., which endorsed Mara, disagreed with Summersgill’s assessment. He said Mara’s strong showing in precincts with high concentrations of LGBT residents show that they are not permanently tied to Democratic candidates.
“When presented with a viable alternative, our community is not monolithic,” he said.
Final but unofficial returns released Tuesday night by the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics show Orange receiving 28 percent of the vote. Mara came in second with 26 percent. Biddle came in third with 20 percent, with Weaver coming in fourth place with 13 percent.
Democrat Joshua Lopez, who also expressed strong support on LGBT issues, received 7 percent. The remaining four candidates — Democrats Tom Brown and Dorothy Douglas; Statehood Green Party candidate Alan Page; and independent Arkan Haile — received a combined total of less than 5 percent.
Orange, who came out against same-sex marriage when he ran for mayor in 2006, reversed his position on the issue last year, saying he now supports the city’s marriage equality law. He pointed to what he called his strong pro-LGBT record during his tenure as a Ward 5 Council member from 1997 to 2007 on LGBT issues other than marriage equality.
In the weeks leading up to the election, Orange campaigned in many of the city’s gay bars. He received applause when he spoke earlier this month to a crowd attending a drag show at the Southwest gay nightclub Ziegfeld’s. Last week he hosted a meet-and-greet reception at the gay sports bar Nellie’s on U Street, N.W.
A number of LGBT activists backed his candidacy, including veteran gay Democratic and Ward 8 civic activist Phil Pannell, who was trailing in his own race on Tuesday for a Ward 8 school board seat.
Biddle received the endorsement of the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the city’s largest LGBT political group, and was backed by most of the city’s prominent LGBT activist leaders. He spoke out in support of LGBT-related issues in the city’s public schools during his tenure as a Ward 4 school board member.
He also received endorsements from Mayor Vincent Gray, Council Chair Kwame Brown, and seven other Council members, including gay Council member David Catania (I-At-Large).
Some political observers said Biddle, who had the reputation of a good-government reformist and progressive candidate, suffered when Gray and Brown came under scrutiny over allegations of cronyism and abuse of government perks.
Gray became embroiled over allegations that a few of his high-level appointees hired family members to high-paying city jobs and that one of his top officials hired a former mayoral candidate to a high paying city job as a quid pro quo for helping Gray in the mayoral race.
Brown came under criticism for arranging for the city to purchase two “fully loaded” Lincoln SUVs for his use as Council chair. He later announced he would seek to return the vehicles after expressions of outrage poured in from constituents and media commentators.
With that as a backdrop, many voters – both gay and straight – may have perceived Biddle as the candidate of the entrenched political establishment at a time when city residents were becoming impatient with “business as usual” by city government leaders, according to City Hall observers.
In January, the D.C. Democratic State Committee voted to appoint Biddle as the interim at-large Council member to temporarily hold the seat vacated by Democrat Kwame Brown, who won election last November as Council chair.
Lateefah Williams, president of the Stein Club, said she doesn’t believe “rank and file” LGBT voters rejected the recommendations of the LGBT activist leaders who backed Biddle.
“The turnout in this election was too low to use it as a barometer to assess the impact of the endorsement of LGBT activists, including the Stein Club,” she said. “In the last Democratic primary, which for D.C.’s purposes is the election, eight of the nine Stein-endorsed candidates prevailed. So that indicates that the unique circumstances surrounding this race had a huge impact on the results.”
Like other activists commenting on Tuesday’s election, Williams said Biddle most likely was “a casualty of the prevailing sentiment against many of our locally elected officials.”
Biddle, Orange, Weaver and Mara each spoke out in support of LGBT and AIDS-related issues during the campaign. So did most of the other five candidates in the race; no one spoke against LGBT rights.
Similar to the city’s Democratic primary election last year in which Gray defeated former Mayor Adrian Fenty, voters in Tuesday’s special D.C. Council election appear to have divided along racial lines.
Mara, who is white, won by a significant margin in the majority white Wards 2, 3 and 6. Weaver, who is also white, won by a large margin in Ward 1, in which whites have a slight majority.
Orange, who is black, won by lopsided margins in majority black Wards 4, 5, 7, and 8.
All but one of the LGBT-oriented precincts are in majority white Wards 1, 2 and 6. Activists familiar with demographic trends in the city’s LGBT community point out that black LGBT residents tend to be dispersed throughout the city as well as within the majority black wards, making it difficult to accurately determine how they vote.
Precinct 112 in Anacostia is believed to have a high concentration of black gays living in various high-rise apartment buildings. Precinct 127, located in the Southwest Waterfront neighborhood, is believed to have a significant number of black LGBT professionals, many of whom reportedly work in nearby federal government offices.
Orange won Precinct 112 with 58 percent of the vote, with Biddle coming in second with just 17 percent. Mara received 4 percent and Weaver received 2 percent.
The vote breakdown in Precinct 127 was closer, with Orange winning with 31 percent and Biddle finishing second with 27 percent. Mara finished third in the precinct with 21 percent and Weaver received 10 percent.
Following is the vote breakdown of the leading four candidates in the race in other precincts with high concentrations of LGBT residents. Percentages are rounded:
• Precinct 14 (Dupont Circle): Mara, 50 percent; Weaver, 21 percent; Biddle, 18 percent; Orange, 4 percent.
• Precinct 15 (Dupont Circle): Mara, 39 percent; Weaver 25 percent; 21 percent; Orange, 5 percent.
• Precinct 16 (Logan Circle): Mara, 46 percent; Weaver 18 percent; Biddle, 14 percent; Orange, 8 percent.
• Precinct 17 (Logan Circle): Mara, 41 percent; Biddle, 19 percent; Weaver, 18 percent; Orange, 13 percent.
• Precinct 18 (Shaw): Mara, 25 percent (94 votes); Orange, 25 percent (91 votes); Weaver, 23 percent; Biddle, 16 percent.
• Precinct 22 (14th and U Street, N.W. corridor): Weaver, 33 percent; Mara, 32 percent; Biddle, 19 percent; Orange, 10 percent.
• Precinct 23 (U Street-Columbia Heights): Weaver, 35 percent; Mara, 20 percent; Biddle, 15 percent; Orange, 12 percent.
• Precinct 24 (Adams Morgan): Weaver, 43 percent; Mara, 21 percent; Biddle, 17 percent; Orange, 11 percent.
• Precinct 25 (Adams Morgan): Weaver, 41 percent; Mara, 33 percent; Biddle, 15 percent; Orange, 4 percent.
• Precinct 36 (Columbia Heights): Weaver, 36 percent; Mara, 18 percent (69 votes); Orange, 18 percent (69 votes); Biddle, 14 percent.
• Precinct 89 (Capitol Hill): Mara, 55 percent; Biddle, 16 percent (104 votes); Weaver, 16 percent, 103 votes); Lopez, 7 percent; Orange, 4 percent.
• Precinct 90 (Capitol Hill): Mara, 45 percent; Lopez, 18 percent (55 votes); Weaver, 18 percent (53 votes); Biddle, 14 percent; Orange, 5 percent.
Ragtops rock! For drivers looking to carve their own lane, the world already has enough sensible crossovers, minivans, and pickups. These three convertibles trade practicality for sunshine, wind, and the occasional wild-hair day.
BMW Z4

$58,000
MPG: 25 city/33 highway
0 to 60 mph: 5.2 seconds
Trunk space: 10.0 cu. ft.
PROS: Strong engines. Uber comfy. Stylish.
CONS: Expensive. Final year of production.
Act fast, Bimmer fans, this is the last year the BMW Z4 roadster will be produced. Along with the entry-level xDrive30i and high-performing M40i, there is a Final Edition model.
Since 2002, the Z4 has expertly balanced performance, comfort, and style. The long hood and short rear deck still look fantastic. The stance is athletic. And with the top down, this car gains an extra dose of drama.
Under the hood, BMW offers turbo power that feels eager rather than overwhelming. Acceleration is brisk. The steering precise. The chassis composed.
Upgrading to the premium models lets you scoot from 0 to 60 mph in just 3.9 seconds. But—ka-ching!—the MSRP soars to $79,000.
Available in manual or automatic transmissions, this convertible can sprint through mountain roads on Saturday and soothingly devour highway miles on Sunday.
As for the interior, it blends luxury and functionality. Materials feel expensive. Controls are easy to use. And the seats are supportive.
For me, other ragtops may be more party hearty, but the Z4 is low-key, impeccably tailored and still the center of attention. Think suave James Bond versus sparkling RuPaul.
MAZDA MX-5 MIATA

$32,000
MPG: 26 city/35 highway
0 to 60 mph: 5.5 seconds
Trunk space: 5.0 cu. ft.
PROS: Nimble. Lightweight. Affordable.
CONS: So-so power. Wind noise. Limited space
For decades, the Mazda MX-5 Miata has followed a simple formula: Keep it light, keep it balanced and make every drive feel special. The result: Automotive comfort food that never gets old.
Many vehicles grow larger every year, but the Miata has remained Lilliputian in a way that feels rebellious. You sit low. The controls are user-friendly. Visibility is excellent.
No, the engine power won’t blow you away. But this beachcomber isn’t about brute force. It’s about how the Miata makes you feel wonderfully alive, whether tootling along city streets or a winding road.
Inside, the dashboard is sparse but echoes a traditional sports car. Large analog tachometer and analog speedometer. And while the 8.8-inch infotainment display is dinky, it works nicely.
Alas, storage is limited. The cabin is snug. And taller drivers may wish for a bit more room.
Yet somehow even those compromises feel almost charming. This ride knows exactly what it is and refuses to apologize. Sort of like showing up to Pride wearing what makes you happy rather than chasing trends.
MINI COOPER

$27,000
MPG: 28 city/39 highway
0 to 60 mph: 7.9 seconds
Trunk space: 5.2 cu. ft.
PROS: Playful styling. Fun handling. Extra stowage.
CONS: Ride can be firm. Not a speed demon.
Mini Coopers approach life with a wink and a grin. Rounded headlights. Compact dimensions. Cheerful styling. It all works to create a vehicle that looks like it’s having fun before you’ve even started the engine.
Driving this ragtop is equally entertaining. The steering is quick, and the chassis feels eager to please. Overall performance is lively rather than blistering.
The cabin leans heavily into Mini’s playful design language. Circular elements appear throughout. Details feel intentionally quirky. Many modern interiors seem created by committees that fear excitement. This cabin feels designed by someone who enjoys color, personality and perhaps spontaneous dance breaks.
Unlike the BMW Z4 and Mazda Miata, the Mini offers a small rear seat. “Small” is doing some heavy lifting there, but the extra space adds flexibility. It may not be enough room to comfortably squeeze in friends, but you can easily stow a few bags here.
To me, driving this convertible feels like attending the world’s friendliest block party. People notice it. People smile. Sometimes people even wave.
While one would hope it’s easy to calculate a break-even point for a home purchase – such as you could calculate for “how many widgets a month do I need to sell to break even?” It’s not always easy when looking at the return on investment for a home purchase. Condo buildings can lose a view due to new construction next door. Weather patterns can expose deficiencies. Conversely, new dining and entertainment options in a neighborhood can cause home prices to skyrocket. The addition of public transportation and employment options can make a neighborhood more desirable. Or, as we have recently seen in the District of Columbia – an incoming presidential administration can severely affect the “vibe” of an entire city’s economy – for better or for worse.
Homeownership is not necessarily a get rich quick scheme. Most homeowners find that staying in a house for at least 5-10 years – whether owner occupied or not, makes for a significant return on their investment. An owner may not completely pay off a home in 10 years, but they might gain enough equity that they can receive quite a large check when they decide to sell or move. And the old reasoning that “your apartment rental community does not cut you a sizeable check when moving out after 15 years.” still stands. Is homeownership for everyone? Absolutely not. But many have reported other benefits besides purely financial gains. What are those benefits?
- Feeling a sense of community. – homeowners tend to take more pride in their buildings and neighborhoods, because they feel more invested and tend to want to protect their investment. Neighborhood watch programs, getting to know elderly neighbors, forming building wide or cul-de-sac wide favorite TV show watch nights, super bowl parties, and other such communal and social ties lead to an overall sense of wellbeing and help to stabilize a nervous system in uncertain times.
- Feng Shui? Well, maybe there’s something to it. If you have been wanting to customize your own home but live in an apartment, there are many more restrictions on what you can do in a rental, than when you own your own home. Do you want new countertops? Would you love to remove that popcorn ceiling? Open up that kitchen? Convert the back yard into a curated patio/cold plunge/hot tub time machine cookout/spring break adventure campsite of your wildest dreams?
- Forming longer lasting relationships – sharing that CostCo membership with others on your floor, making a pan of lasagna and inviting the neighbors over for dinner, picking your neighbor’s brain for stock investment advice, asking your neighbor’s son to help you create a marketing plan for your new business, hosting the Friendsgiving you dreamed of – there are multitudes of reasons and ways that homeowners tend to feel a sense of community, sharing of resources, and realizing over time that “it takes a village.”
- Higher civic engagement – Studies have shown that homeowners tend to be more politically active in their districts, participate in local school boards, know the names of and how to contact their local representatives to affect change, etc. Having a higher financial investment in and a commitment to stay in a neighborhood beyond just one or two years makes a big difference in who decides to show up at election time, especially for local elections.
If you would like to know more about the research on homeownership, feel free to read the report from the National Association of Realtors here.
Joseph Hudson is a referral agent with RLAH. Reach him at 703-587-0597 or [email protected].
Real Estate
D.C.’s housing reality: Cautious optimism meets landlord strain
Cost of living remains a major problem
Washington has long prided itself on stability. Anchored by the federal government and buoyed by a highly educated workforce, the District has historically weathered economic uncertainty better than most cities.
But beneath that stability, cracks have been showing since January 2025.
I was having a conversation with a prospective client the other day and offered him a candid assessment of the District’s economic outlook. Simply put, structural challenges have been shaping the city’s future, a new mayoral election, and more that blends cautious optimism with clear concern about the changes ahead.
For one, the long-term shift toward remote and hybrid work continues to reshape the city in ways many people still underestimate. There has been a change in the rhythm of downtown D.C., reduced daytime foot traffic for local businesses, and created uncertainty for commercial real estate owners and the neighborhoods that depended on those workers every day.
At the same time, the cost of living in the District continues to rise at a pace that many residents are struggling to absorb. Even residents with strong incomes are becoming more cautious about spending and relocation decisions.
Landlords are feeling those pressures as well. Many smaller housing providers are operating in an environment where expenses continue to rise faster than revenue while the regulatory environment has grown increasingly complex. For some rental owners, especially those with older buildings or only a few rental units, the math is making it harder to cover costs, much less generate passive income.
There is also growing concern about the District government’s own financial outlook. Significant budget pressures and spending cuts are being had in a more serious way than many Washingtonians are used to hearing. As uncertainty in federal employment affects local tax revenue and consumer confidence, how will the city fund services, infrastructure, housing programs, and public safety priorities in the years ahead?
At the same time, consumer confidence feels noticeably down than it did even a few years ago. People are taking longer to make decisions, whether that means signing a lease, purchasing a home, renovating a property, or expanding a business. That hesitation creates a slower-moving marketplace where caution often replaces momentum.
Despite all this, Washington has proven remarkably resilient over time. The city continues to attract talented professionals, international investment, universities, healthcare institutions, and industries tied to government, law, technology, and public policy. Neighborhoods continue to evolve, and demand for well-managed rental housing remains strong in the core areas of the city.
Unlike other major cities driven by private industry, federal employment and contracting are two of the main pillars of Washington’s economy. That reliance has long insulated the region from deep recessions. But it also creates vulnerability when federal activity slows.
D.C.’s economy is far more interconnected and interdependent than many people fully appreciate. Between significant federal layoffs, the District’s high unemployment rate, and broader economic uncertainty, there are a number of warning signs that property owners should be paying close attention to. When federal hiring slows or contracts tighten, the impact extends well beyond government workers themselves. It affects restaurants, retail, housing, and countless other sectors tied to the District’s economic activity.
Brookings Institution has documented how job losses in higher-income sectors can disproportionately impact urban economies—precisely because those workers drive local spending.
Research from the Urban Institute supports this view, noting that federal workforce disruptions can quickly ripple through the region’s economy. For landlords and renters alike, those ripples are already being felt. Renters see many more properties on the market which gives them leverage on negotiating discounts in rent or special incentives. Housing providers, already squeezed by the reality of a weak economy and strong regulations face lowering rents and income.
For years, affordability has been one of D.C.’s most persistent challenges. Much of that pressure has been driven by strong job growth and sustained demand for housing at a pace that new housing inventory has struggled to match. That imbalance has steadily pushed rents and home prices higher, leaving many residents financially stretched.
Recent multifamily housing data suggests the market is already beginning to adjust. Developers delivered more than 15,000 apartment units across the Washington metropolitan area over the past year, and several industry reports have noted that elevated supply levels, combined with slower demand growth, have contributed to softer occupancy levels and downward pressure on rents in portions of the region. CoStar, CBRE, and Northmarq have all reported rising vacancy rates across segments of the D.C. multifamily market as newly delivered Class A inventory continues entering the pipeline at a time when hiring growth has moderated and federal workforce uncertainty has increased.
At the same time, several economists and housing analysts have cautioned that the District’s affordability challenges are deeply structural and unlikely to disappear quickly. The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University has repeatedly identified Washington among the nation’s more cost-burdened metropolitan areas, particularly for renters, while Zillow data continues to show housing costs consuming a substantial percentage of household income for many residents.
From my own perspective as a property manager working directly in the market every day, I believe we are beginning to see the early stages of a market recalibration rather than a collapse. Anecdotally, there appears to be more competition among larger apartment buildings than there was several years ago, particularly in neighborhoods where substantial new inventory has recently delivered. That does not necessarily mean dramatic rent declines are coming, but it does suggest that the imbalance between supply and demand may be moderating somewhat after years of sustained upward pressure on pricing.
Even if prices soften, affordability will remain a long-term challenge.
Regulation and the Realities of Tenant Turnover
The same rental owner I spoke with pointed to regulatory hurdles as a major source of hesitation to continue renting out his property, given past bad experiences with tenants and excessive costs to prepare the rental for a new tenant.
For many small property owners, the cumulative weight of regulation, maintenance costs, and market uncertainty is becoming harder to bear. Clients of mine have described feeling overwhelmed, not just financially, but emotionally. What was once a source of pride has, in some cases, become a source of stress.
We’re seeing more small landlords sell their rental homes, questioning whether it’s worth staying in the market. That’s a significant shift from even five or ten years ago. The National Multifamily Housing Council has noted that regulatory complexity often disproportionately impacts smaller landlords, who lack the resources of larger firms.
Some are choosing to sell. Others are simply trying to hold on. The result is the same – less rental housing for DC residents.
A Shift From Pride to Disillusionment
Perhaps the most striking theme is the emotional shift described by the property owner. For some, owning property in D.C., once a milestone achievement, has become a source of disillusionment. They cited financial losses, regulatory frustration, and a growing sense of political alienation.
There are also broader concerns about:
- The decline of small multifamily ownership
- Rising foreclosures in certain segments
- Increased consolidation by larger institutional landlords
If small landlords continue to exit the market, it changes the entire housing ecosystem. You lose diversity in housing options, and that can have long-term consequences for affordability. It also robs families of having homes large enough to live in.
Politics and Policy: A System at a Standstill?
The political environment has obviously been a key factor shaping the city’s housing future. Following the 2026 elections, a lack of significant leadership change may result in continued policy stagnation.
Without meaningful policy shifts, we’re likely to see more of the same: continued and increasing pressure on landlords and not enough study and focus on policies to increase housing supply by first stopping those property owners fleeing the District’s extreme tenant friendliness. The D.C. City Council remains central to these decisions, with advocacy groups continuing to push for expanded tenant protections. The importance of balance cannot be understated: ensuring protections for renters while maintaining a viable environment for housing providers.
Taken together, these dynamics point to a housing system at a crossroads.
D.C. must find a way to balance:
- Tenant protections
- Housing affordability
- Landlord sustainability
- Long-term investment in housing supply
What’s Next?
D.C. isn’t going anywhere. The question is how it adapts. If we can find the right balance, there’s a path forward, but it’s going to take time and thoughtful policy decisions. For landlords, that path will require adaptability and engagement. For renters, it may mean gradual rather than immediate relief. For policymakers, it presents a clear challenge: create a system that works for everyone.
Scott Bloom is owner and senior property manager of Columbia Property Management. Contact him via ColumbiaPM.com.

