Connect with us

Living

Orange wins race for at-large Council seat

Mara, Weaver capture ‘gay’ precincts

Published

on

Vincent Orange (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

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.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Real Estate

New year, new housing landscape for D.C. landlords

Several developments expected to influence how rental housing operates

Published

on

Muriel Bowser has advocated for more affordable housing during her time as mayor. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

As 2026 begins, Washington, D.C.’s rental housing landscape continues to evolve in ways that matter to small landlords, tenants, and the communities they serve. At the center of many of these conversations is the Small Multifamily & Rental Owners Association (SMOA), a D.C.–based organization that advocates for small property owners and the preservation of the city’s naturally occurring affordable housing.

At their December “DC Housing Policy Summit,” city officials, housing researchers, lenders, attorneys, and housing providers gathered to discuss the policies and proposals shaping the future of rental housing in the District. The topics ranged from recent legislative changes to emerging ballot initiatives and understanding how today’s policy decisions will affect housing stability tomorrow.

Why Housing Policy Matters in 2026

If you are a landlord or a tenant, several developments now underway in D.C., are expected to influence how rental housing operates in the years ahead.

One of the most significant developments is the Rebalancing Expectations for Neighbors, Tenants and Landlords (RENTAL) Act of 2025, a sweeping piece of legislation passed last fall and effective December 31, 2025, which updates a range of housing laws. This broad housing reform law will modernize housing regulations and address long-standing court backlogs, and in a practical manner, assist landlords with shortened notice and filing requirements for lawsuits.  The Act introduces changes to eviction procedures, adjusts pre-filing notice timelines, and modifies certain tenant protections under previous legislation, the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act. 

At the same time, the District has expanded its Rent Registry, to have a better overview of licensed rental units in the city with updated technology that tracks rental units subject to and exempt from rent control and other related housing information. Designed to improve transparency and enforcement, Rent Registry makes it easier for all parties to verify rent control status and compliance.

Looking ahead to the 2026 election cycle, a proposed ballot initiative for a two-year rent freeze is generating significant conversation. If it qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, the measure would pause rent increases across the District for two years. While still in the proposal phase, it reflects the broader focus on tenant affordability that continues to shape housing policy debates.

What This Means for Rental Owners

Taken together, these changes underscore how closely policy and day-to-day operations are connected for small landlords. Staying informed about notice requirements, registration obligations, and evolving regulations isn’t just a legal necessity. It’s a key part of maintaining stable, compliant rental properties.

With discussions underway about rent stabilization, voucher policies, and potential rent freezes, long-term revenue projections will be influenced by regulatory shifts just as much as market conditions alone. Financial and strategic planning becomes even more important to protect your interests.

Preparing for the Changes

As the owner of a property management company here in the District, I’ve spent much of the past year thinking about how these changes translate from legislation into real-world operations.

The first priority has been updating our eviction and compliance workflows to align with the RENTAL Act of 2025. That means revising how delinquent rent cases are handled, adjusting notice procedures, and helping owners understand how revised timelines and court processes may affect the cost, timing, and strategy behind enforcement decisions.

Just as important, we’re shifting toward earlier, more proactive communication around compliance and regulatory risk. Rather than reacting after policies take effect, we’re working to flag potential exposure in advance, so owners can make informed decisions before small issues become costly problems.

A Bigger Picture for 2026

Housing policy in Washington, D.C., has always reflected the city’s values from protecting tenants to preserving affordability in rapidly changing neighborhoods. As those policies continue to evolve, the challenge will be finding the right balance between stability for renters and sustainability for the small property owners who provide much of the city’s housing.

The conversations happening now at policy summits, in Council chambers, and across neighborhood communities will shape how rental housing is regulated. For landlords, tenants, and legislators alike, 2026 represents an opportunity to engage thoughtfully, to ask hard questions, and to create a future where compliance, fairness, and long-term stability go hand-in-hand.

Continue Reading

Real Estate

Unconventional homes becoming more popular

HGTV show shines spotlight on alternatives to cookie cutter

Published

on

Shipping container homes have gained popularity in recent years. (Photo by Suchat Siriboot/Bigstock)

While stuck in the house surrounded by snow and ice, I developed a new guilty pleasure: watching “Ugliest House in America” on HGTV. For several hours a day, I looked at other people’s unfortunate houses. Some were victims of multiple additions, some took on the worst décor of the ‘70s, and one was even built in the shape of a boat.

In today’s world, the idea of what a house should look like has shifted dramatically. Gone are the days of cookie-cutter suburban homes with white picket fences. Instead, a new wave of architects, designers, and homeowners are pushing the boundaries of traditional housing to create unconventional and innovative spaces that challenge our perceptions of what a home can be.

One of the most popular forms of alternative housing is the tiny house. These pint-sized dwellings are typically fewer than 500 square feet and often are set on trailers to allow for mobility. Vans and buses can also be reconfigured as tiny homes for the vagabonds among us.

These small wonders offer an affordable and sustainable living option for those wishing to downsize and minimize their environmental footprint. With clever storage solutions, multipurpose furniture, and innovative design features, tiny homes have become a creative and functional housing solution for many, although my dogs draw the line at climbing Jacob’s Ladder-type steps.

Another unusual type of housing gaining popularity is the shipping container home. Made from repurposed shipping containers, these homes offer a cost-effective and environmentally friendly way to create modern and sleek living spaces. With their industrial aesthetic and modular design, shipping container homes are a versatile option for those contemplating building a unique and often multi-level home.

For those looking to connect with nature, treehouses are a whimsical and eccentric housing option. Nestled high up in the trees, these homes offer a sense of seclusion and tranquility that is hard to find in traditional housing. With their distinctive architecture and stunning views, treehouses can be a magical retreat for those seeking a closer connection to the natural world.

For a truly off-the-grid living experience, consider an Earthship home. These self-sustaining homes use recycled construction materials and rely on renewable energy sources like solar power and rainwater harvesting. With their passive solar design and natural ventilation systems, Earthship homes are a model of environmentally friendly living.

For those with a taste for the bizarre, consider a converted silo home. These cylindrical structures provide an atypical canvas for architects and designers to create modern and minimalist living spaces. With curved walls and soaring ceilings, silo homes offer a one-of-a-kind living experience that is sure to leave an impression.

Barn homes have gained popularity in recent years. These dwellings take the rustic charm of a traditional barn and transform it into a modern and stylish living space. With their open, flexible floor plans, lofty ceilings, and exposed wooden beams, barn homes offer a blend of traditional and contemporary design elements that create a warm and inviting atmosphere, while being tailored to the needs and preferences of the homeowner.

In addition to their unique character, barn homes also offer a sense of history and charm that is hard to find in traditional housing. Many of them have a rich and storied past, with some dating back decades or even centuries.

If you relish life on the high seas (or at a marina on the bay), consider a floating home. These aquatic abodes differ from houseboats in that they remain on the dock rather than traverse the waterways. While most popular on the West Coast (remember “Sleepless in Seattle”?), you sometimes see them in Florida, with a few rentals available in Baltimore’s Inner Harbor and infrequent sales at our own D.C. Wharf. Along with the sense of community found in marinas, floating homes offer a peaceful retreat from the hustle and bustle of city life.

From tiny homes on wheels to treehouses in the sky or homes that float, these distinctive dwellings offer a fresh perspective on how we live and modify traditional thoughts on what a house should be. Sadly, most of these homes rely on appropriate zoning for building and placement, which can limit their use in urban or suburban areas. 

Nonetheless, whether you’re looking for a sustainable and eco-friendly living option or a whimsical retreat, there is sure to be an unconventional housing option that speaks to your sense of adventure and creativity. So, why settle for a run-of-the-mill ranch or a typical townhouse when you can live in a unique and intriguing space that reflects your personality and lifestyle?


Valerie M. Blake is a licensed Associate Broker in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia with RLAH @properties. Call or text her at 202-246-8602, email her at [email protected] or follow her on Facebook at TheRealst8ofAffairs.

Continue Reading

Real Estate

Convert rent check into an automatic investment, Marjorie!

Basic math shows benefits of owning vs. renting

Published

on

Knowledgeable lenders can discuss useful down payment assistance programs to help a buyer ‘find the money.’ (

Suppose people go out for dinner and everyone is talking about how they are investing their money. Some are having fun with a few new apps they downloaded – where one can round up purchases and then bundle that money into a weekly or monthly investment that grows over time, which is a smart thing to do. The more automatic one can make the investments, the less is required to “think about it” and the more it just happens. It becomes a habit and a habit becomes a reward over time.  

Another habit one can get into is just making that rent check an investment. One must live somewhere, correct? And in many larger U.S. cities like New York, Chicago, D.C., Los Angeles, Miami, Charlotte, Atlanta, Dallas, Nashville, Austin, or even most mid-market cities, rents can creep up towards $2,000 a month (or more) with ease.  

Well, do the math. At $2,000 per month over one year, that’s $24,000. If someone stays in that apartment (with no rent increases) for even three years, that amount triples to $72,000.  According to Rentcafe.com, the average rent in the United States at the end of 2025 was around $1,700 a month. Even that amount of rent can total between $60,000 and $80,000 over 3-4 years.  

What if that money was going into an investment each month? Now, yes, the argument is that most mortgage payments, in the early years, are more toward the interest than the principal.  However, at least a portion of each payment is going toward the principal.  

What about closing costs and then selling costs? If a home is owned for three years, and then one pays out of pocket to close on that home (usually around 2-3% of the sales price), does owning it for even three years make it worth it? It could be argued that owning that home for only three years is not enough time to recoup the costs of mostly paying the interest plus paying the closing costs.

Let’s look at some math:

A $300,000 condo – at 3% is $9,000 for closing costs.

One can also put as little as 3 or 3.5% down on a home – so that is also around $9,000. 

If a buyer uses D.C. Opens Doors or a similar program – a down payment can be provided and paid back later when the property is sold so that takes care of some of the upfront costs. Knowledgeable lenders can often discuss other useful down payment assistance programs to help a buyer “find the money.”  

Another useful tactic many agents use is to ask for a credit from the seller. If a property has sat on the market for weeks, the seller may be willing to give a closing cost credit. That amount can vary. New construction sellers may also offer these closing cost credits as well.  

And that, Marjorie, just so you will know, and your children will someday know, is THE NIGHT THE RENT CHECK WENT INTO AN INVESTMENT ACCOUNT ON GEORGIA AVENUE!


Joseph Hudson is a referral agent with Metro Referrals. Reach him at 703-587-0597 or [email protected].

Continue Reading

Popular