Local
Here come the grooms
With the city’s historic same-sex marriage law expected to take effect in less than three weeks, the application form for a marriage license at the D.C. Superior Court still leaves space only for the names of bride and groom.
But a spokesperson for D.C. Council member David Catania (I-At Large), author of the Religious Freedom & Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act, said the marriage license application form is among a few last-minute details that the city and the court are expected to address in the next two weeks.
The law that Catania wrote and the City Council approved allows partners to describe themselves on a marriage license as a bride, groom or spouse.
Ben Young, Catania’s chief of staff, told DC Agenda this week that the form change was “being worked on.”
“Should the D.C. bill become law, the court will be ready on the effective date with forms for applicants to use that refer to spouses, not brides and grooms,” said Superior Court spokesperson Leah Gurowitz.
For same-sex couples planning to wed in the District after the new law takes effect March 3, a civil wedding at the courthouse or a religious wedding from an LGBT-friendly place of worship will be available to them.
Under city law, all couples seeking to be married must apply for and receive a marriage license, which costs $35. The application for the license can be obtained online at dccourts.gov, but it must be submitted and paid for in person.
Also under D.C. law, the minimum age for obtaining a marriage license without the need for parental consent is 18. A marriage license for people between the ages of 16 and 17 can be obtained only with the consent of a parent or legal guardian, and no one under age 16 can marry.
“When applying for a marriage license, you may request a civil wedding, specifying the date and time you would like to be married, at least 10 days from the date of application,” according to the Marriage Bureau Section of the court’s web site.
The site says a court clerk will contact the applicants to confirm the date and make final arrangements for a civil ceremony, which is performed by a court official in a designated room at the courthouse. The courthouse is located at 500 Indiana Ave., N.W.
According to the court’s web site, the “marriage ceremony room” holds about one dozen guests. A certified copy of the marriage license can be obtained on the day of the ceremony for $10. There is no fee for the ceremony or use of the room, but wedding participants are asked to consider making a tax-deductable donation to the D.C. Superior Court Art Trust Fund.
Unlike some jurisdictions, judges in D.C. don’t routinely perform civil marriages, although some judges do so for couples with whom they are personal friends, according to a court source who spoke on condition of not being identified. D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty is not authorized to perform civil marriages under city law.
“The Clerk of the Court, and those he deputizes, may perform marriages at the courthouse, as well as judges,” Gurowitz said. “Generally, judges do not perform courthouse weddings, as they are on the bench with their calendars to handle during weekday work hours.”
Gurowitz declined to say whether court personnel authorized to perform civil marriages would be allowed to decline to perform a same-sex marriage if they have religious or moral objections to such marraiges, as is the case in some states.
“We do not comment on personnel and staffing matters,” she said.
Several D.C. clergy members said this week that despite the vocal opposition to same-sex marriage from some local clergy, a large number of clergy and their places of worship stand ready and willing to perform gay weddings.
The new law allows clergy to refuse to perform same-sex marriages and refuse to allow their facilities to be used for such marriages if performing such marriages is contrary to their religious beliefs.
“We’re prepared to begin marrying same-sex couples as soon as the law goes into place,” said Rev. Robert Harties, pastor of All Souls Unitarian Church. “I’ve already been in conversation with members of my congregation who are interested in becoming married and who are making plans for their wedding dates.”
Harties serves as co-chair of D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality, which he said has close to 200 members. He noted that most members of the group, along with their respective churches or other places of worship, including synagogues, are planning to host same-sex wedding ceremonies.
Also looking forward to performing same-sex weddings are at least five LGBT-oriented churches or congregations in the city that have long performed same-sex commitment ceremonies. Among them are Metropolitan Community Church of D.C., Unity Fellowship and Inner Light Ministries, which provide Protestant services; Bet Mishpachah, widely known as the city’s LGBT syngogue; and Dignity Washington, which offers a weekly Mass for LGBT Catholics.
Rev. Dwayne Johnson, pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church since January, said MCC churches across the country have performed what some of its members consider to be weddings since the church was founded in 1969.
“In a sense it was a form of political resistance on some level,” he said. “What was not accepted in the eyes of the state we felt was accepted in the eyes of God. So we will continue to bless relationships, and now to be able to do it legally is really exciting.”
Rev. Abena McCray, pastor of Unity Fellowship, which has a largely African-American protestant congregation, said the church is preparing to offer same-sex weddings when the D.C. gay marriage law takes effect.
Jack Hillelsohn, Bet Mispachah’s vice president for religious affairs, said the congregation’s rabbi, Toby Manewith, is a member of D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality and is excited about performing same-sex marriages.
“Kiddushin is the Hebrew word for marriage, and we have performed these in the past without legal standing,” Hillesohn said. “There’s always been the need for this ceremony, and now we’re pleased to be able to do it with full legal standing.”
Ray Panas, president of Dignity Washington, said the LGBT Catholic group recognizes that plans to arrange for Catholic same-sex marriage ceremonies in D.C. will face difficulties given the Catholic Church’s strong opposition to same-sex marriage. The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington is expected to prohibit diocesan priests from performing same-sex marriages.
But Panas said priests associated with Catholic orders or societies independent of the archdiocese have often celebrated the Catholic Mass for Dignity members. He noted that the group is hopeful some arrangements can be made for a priest to perform same-sex marriages for its members.
Under D.C. law, clergy who are licensed and credentialed under their respective religious faiths must also obtain a city license to perform a marriage. Johnson and McCray aren’t currently licensed to perform marriages, but the two said they are taking immediate steps to obtain a license, which is also issued at the D.C. Superior Court.
Harties and officials with the four LGBT-oriented congregations said their respective congregations have long offered various forms of relationship counseling for couples contemplating marriage or domestic partnerships. They said they would continue this practice with same-sex couples seeking to marry.
However, gay rights attorneys have advised same-sex couples considering marriage to be aware of local divorce laws in the event that a relationship ends and a separation is sought.
One aspect of the D.C. divorce laws that could be a factor for same-sex couples who come to the District from other states to marry is a six-month residency requirement. Either spouse must be a city resident for at least six months before the couple is eligible to file for divorce.
Other aspects of the city’s divorce laws, including options of both no-fault and fault filings and property distribution and child custody and support provisions, can be reviewed in the divorce section of the Superior Court’s web site.
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. 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,” 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,” 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.”
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 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.
Brittney Griner considered suicide in Russian prison
Senegalese NGO claims new president discussed LGBTQ rights with top EU official
What Anne Arundel County school board candidates think about book bans
It’s game, set, and mismatch in unfulfilling ‘Challengers’
D.C. Council member proposes change for Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs
HHS reverses Trump-era anti-LGBTQ rule
4th Circuit rules gender identity is a protected characteristic
PHOTOS: Capital Pride Pageant
New World Bank US executive director: LGBTQ rights are human rights
