Connect with us

Local

D.C. Council candidates court LGBT voters

Graham, Bonds face opposition in April primary

Published

on

Jim Graham, Anita Bonds, D.C. Council, gay news, Washington Blade, Democratic Party
Jim Graham, Anita Bonds, D.C. Council, gay news, Washington Blade, Democratic Party, LGBT voters

Council members Jim Graham and Anita Bonds are seeking re-election and facing Democratic opposition in the April primary. (Washington Blade file photos by Michael Key)

LGBT voters could play a key role in determining the nominees for at least three of the six D.C. Council seats up for grabs in the city’s April 1 Democratic primary, according to activists familiar with the candidates.

Similar to past years, nearly all of the candidates who are favored to win or who have a shot at winning their primary contests and the general election in November are strong supporters of LGBT rights.

In the April primary, D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large), Council member Mary Cheh(D-Ward 3), and Council member Kenyan McDuffie (D-Ward 5) are considered strong favorites to win in the primary and general election. Cheh is running unopposed in the primary.

Mendelson and Cheh are longtime supporters of the LGBT community and McDuffie has been supportive on LGBT issues since winning his seat in a special election in 2012.

Council member Anita Bonds (D-At-Large) and four-term Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), who’s gay, are running in competitive races in the primary, in the opinion of some political observers, although most knowledgeable observers consider them the clear front-runners.

Bonds, who has been involved in D.C. politics since the early 1980s, has a long record of support for LGBT rights. And Graham, the former head of the Whitman-Walker Clinic, has been among the Council’s strongest advocates on LGBT and AIDS issues during his more than 15 years as a Council member.

The remaining Council race on the primary ballot will be for an open seat in Ward 6, which is being vacated by Council member Tommy Wells, a Democrat who’s running for mayor. Three Democratic candidates running in the primary – Charles Allen, Wells’ former chief of staff; Darrel Thompson, and Shelonda Tillman – have expressed strong support on LGBT issues and are expected to compete for support from the large number of LGBT residents that live in Ward 6.

Graham’s longstanding reputation as a champion for his Ward 1 constituents — both gay and straight — would normally make him a shoo-in for winning election to a fifth term. But an 11-2 vote by his Council colleagues last spring to reprimand him on grounds that he violated the Council’s ethics rules in 2008 by improperly interfering with negotiations over a Metro development contract have raised questions over whether his support in the ward has eroded.

The Council’s vote to reprimand Graham came shortly after the city’s independent ethics board, headed by gay former D.C. Attorney General Robert Spagnoletti, issued an opinion saying Graham did not violate any laws but committed an ethical breach as a city official by intervening in the contract process.

Graham has disputed the claim that he did anything improper, saying he pushed for awarding the contract to one developer over another because the one he favored was better qualified to do the work on a project located in his ward.

Lesbian Democratic activist Barbara Helmick, a longtime resident of Ward 1, said she has voted for Graham in the past but is undecided on whether to vote for him this time.

“Certainly the ethics question has raised eyebrows,” Helmick said. “But Jim has done a lot as a Council member and he has basically done a good job for his constituents.”

Helmick, like other Ward 1 residents, said she’s looking at Graham’s two remaining opponents in the primary, civic activists Bryan Weaver and Brianne Nadeau. Both have been strong supporters of the LGBT community. A third opponent, Beverly Wheeler, a former aide to Council Chair Mendelson, dropped out of the race last week, citing family related issues.

Ward 1 is believed to have the largest concentration of LGBT residents among the city’s eight wards and is home to two LGBT community centers, one of which – Casa Ruby – reaches out to the LGBT Latino community. Activists say that Graham’s prospects for winning the primary would increase significantly if he can retain the support of LGBT voters who have backed him overwhelmingly in past elections.

No Republican, Statehood Green Party or Libertarian Party candidate entered the Ward 1 Council race this year, a development that means Graham would likely face one or more lesser known independent candidates in the November general election if he wins the Democratic nomination in the primary.

Bonds, meanwhile, is being challenged by four other Democrats in the primary in her race for one of two at-large Council seats that will be on the ballot in the November general election. In a process that has often confounded voters, one of the two seats is reserved for a non-majority party candidate under the city’s election law, which means a Democrat cannot compete for the second seat.

Gay D.C. Council member David Catania (I-At-Large) has held the so-called non-Democratic seat since 1997, when he won a special election to fill the then vacant seat. He has been re-elected four times since then, but this year Catania said he’s strongly considering giving up his Council seat to run for mayor.

As an independent, he doesn’t have to make a final decision on whether to seek re-election to the Council or enter the mayoral race until June. Many of the city’s political pundits believe Catania will run for mayor, clearing the way for others to compete for his Council seat.

Gay Republican activist Marc Morgan, a Ward 1 Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner, is running unopposed in the Republican primary for one of the two at-large seats. Should Catania run for mayor, Morgan could be in a strong position to compete for the non-Democratic seat.

A Libertarian Party candidate, who is running unopposed in his party’s primary, and one of two Statehood Green Party candidates running in that party’s primary, will be competing with Morgan for the non-Democratic seat in the November election.

Another openly gay candidate, Libertarian Party activist Martin Moulton, is running unopposed in the Libertarian primary for the city’s U.S. shadow representative seat. Moulton is expected to compete for the shadow seat in the November general election against Democrat Franklin Garcia, who’s running unopposed in the Democratic primary in April.

Out of the four Democrats running against Bonds in the primary, Nate Bennett-Fleming, who currently holds the U.S. shadow representative seat, is considered to be her strongest opponent. Bennett-Fleming has expressed strong support for LGBT rights and won the endorsement of the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the city’s largest LGBT political group, when he ran for the seat in 2012.

The city created shadow U.S. Senate seats and one shadow House of Representatives seat as unpaid lobbying positions to advocate for D.C. statehood and voting representation in Congress.

Although some consider the shadow seats to be of little value because they have no official connection with the U.S. Congress, Bennett-Fleming received more than 43,000 votes when he won the Democratic primary for the seat in 2012. In the 2012 general election, Bennett-Fleming received nearly 207,000 votes.

When Bonds won the at-large seat in a special election last April she received 18,027 votes, or 31.4 percent, in a seven-candidate race with one of the lowest voter turnouts of any D.C. election ever held.

The voter turnout is expected to be larger in this year’s April 1 primary and Bonds’ wider name recognition and longstanding involvement in city politics gives her an edge over Bennett-Fleming and the other three candidates, according to most pundits. But Bonds and her LGBT supporters say she is waging an aggressive outreach effort to capture the LGBT vote to boost her re-election prospects.

Elissa Silverman, a Democrat who came in second behind Bonds in the 2012 special election, reportedly is considering changing her party affiliation from Democrat to independent to run for the non-Democratic at-large seat in the general election.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Virginia

Spanberger signs bill that paves way for marriage amendment repeal referendum

Proposal passed in two successive General Assembly sessions

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

Virginians this year will vote on whether to repeal a state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger on Friday signed state Del. Laura Jane Cohen (D-Fairfax County)’s House Bill 612, which finalized the referendum’s language.

The ballot question that voters will consider on Election Day is below:

Question: Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to: (i) remove the ban on same-sex marriage; (ii) affirm that two adults may marry regardless of sex, gender, or race; and (iii) require all legally valid marriages to be treated equally under the law?

Voters in 2006 approved the Marshall-Newman Amendment.

Same-sex couples have been able to legally marry in Virginia since 2014. Former Gov. Glenn Youngkin, who is a Republican, in 2024 signed a bill that codified marriage equality in state law.

Two successive legislatures must approve a proposed constitutional amendment before it can go to the ballot.

A resolution to repeal the Marshall-Newman Amendment passed in the General Assembly in 2025. Lawmakers once again approved it last month.

“20 years after Virginia added a ban on same-sex marriage to our Constitution, we finally have the chance to right that wrong,” wrote Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman on Friday in a message to her group’s supporters.

Virginians this year will also consider proposed constitutional amendments that would guarantee reproductive rights and restore voting rights to convicted felons who have completed their sentences.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. non-profits find creative ways to aid the unhoused amid funding cuts

City’s poor economic mobility makes it easier to slip into homelessness

Published

on

Federal funding cuts have led to shortages at local nonprofits that assist D.C.’s unhoused population. (Photo by Joe Pchatree/Bigstock)

Homelessness is unlikely to disappear entirely, but it can be minimized and controlled.

That principle guides Everyone Home Executive Director Karen Cunningham’s approach to homeless support and prevention in D.C.

“There’s always going to be some amount of people who have a crisis,” Cunningham said. “The goal is that if they become homeless, [it’s] rare, brief and non-recurring. And in order for that to be the case, we need to have steady investments in programs that we know work over time.”

Making those investments has proven to be an unprecedented challenge, however. Cunningham said non-profits and other organizations like Everyone Home are grappling with government funding cuts or stalls that threaten the work they do to support D.C.’s homeless population.

Despite a 9% decrease in homelessness from 2024 to 2025, advocates worry that stagnant funding will make that progress hard to sustain. Furthermore, D.C. has the worst unemployment rate in the country at 6.7% as of December. The city’s poor economic mobility makes it easier for people to slip into homelessness and harder to break free of it.

There’s a way forward, Cunningham said, but it’s going to take a lot of perseverance and creative solutions from those willing to stay in the fight.

Fighting through setbacks

Reduced funding from the city government has shifted the way Everyone Home operates.

In D.C.’s fiscal year 2026 budget proposal, homeless services and prevention programs saw stalled growth or financial reductions. Even just a few years ago, Cunningham said Everyone Home received a large influx of vouchers to help people who needed long-term supportive housing. The vouchers allowed the non-profit to break people free of the homeless cycle and secure stable housing.

However, those vouchers are scarce these days. Cunningham said the city is investing less in multi-year programs and more in programs that offer preventative and upfront support.

She said this reality has forced Everyone Home to stop operating its Family Rapid Rehab program, which helps families leave shelters and transition into permanent housing. Current funds couldn’t withstand the size of the program and Cunningham said very few organizations can still afford to run similar programs.

The Family Homelessness Prevention program, however, is thriving and expanding at Everyone Home due to its short-term nature. It provides families with 90-day support services to help them get back on track and secure stable finances and housing.

Everyone Home also offers a drop-in day center, where they provide people with emergency clothing, laundry, and meals, and has a street outreach team to support those who are chronically homeless and offer services to them.

Inconsistencies in financial support have created challenges in providing the necessary resources to those struggling. It’s led non-profits like Everyone Home to get creative with their solutions to ensuring no one has recurring or long spouts of homelessness.

“It’s really a sustained investment in these programs and services that can allow us to chip away, because if you put all these resources in and then take your foot off the gas, there’s always people entering the system,” Cunningham said. “And so we have to always be moving people out into housing.”

Getting people in and out of the homeless system isn’t easy due to D.C.’s struggle with providing accessible and affordable housing, D.C. Policy Center executive director Yesim Sayin said in a Nov. 16 Washington Blade article.

Sayin said that D.C.’s construction tailors to middle or upper class people who live in the city because work brought them there, but it excludes families and D.C. natives who may be on the verge of homelessness and have less geographic mobility.

Building more and building smarter ensures D.C.’s low-income population aren’t left behind and at risk of becoming homeless, Sayin said.

That risk is a common one in D.C. given its low economic mobility. Residents have less room to financially grow given the city’s high cost of living, making vulnerable communities more prone to homelessness.

With funding cuts for long-term programs, preventative programs have proven to be vital in supporting the homeless population. When someone becomes homeless, it can have a snowball effect on their life. They aren’t just losing a house –– they may lose their job, access to reliable transportation and food for their family.

Cunningham said resources like the Family Homelessness Prevention program allows people to grow and stabilize before losing crucial life resources.

“Helping people keep what they have and to try to grow that as much as possible is really important where there aren’t a lot of opportunities…for people to increase their income,” Cunningham said.

Through all the funding cuts and reduced services, D.C.’s homeless support organizations are still finding a path forward –– a path that many residents and families rely on to survive.

Pushing forward

Local non-profits and organizations like Everyone Home are the backbone of homeless support when all other systems fail.

When the White House issued an executive order directing agencies to remove homeless encampments on federal land, Coalition For The Homeless provided ongoing shelter to those impacted.

“We were asked by our funders to open two shelters at the time of the encampment policy announcement,” Lucho Vásquez, executive director of Coalition For The Homeless, said. “We opened the shelters on the same day of the request and have been housing 100 more people who are unhoused each night since August.”

This was achieved even after Coalition faced “severe cuts in funding for supportive and security services,” according to Vásquez. Staff members have taken on additional responsibilities to make up for the loss in security coverage and supportive services with no increase in pay, but Vásquez said they’re still trying to fill gaps left by the cuts.

Coalition offers free transitional housing, single room occupancy units and affordable apartments to people who were unhoused. 

Coalition For The Homeless isn’t the only non-profit that’s had to step up its services amid dwindling resources. Thrive D.C. provides hot meals, showers, and winter clothes, which is especially important during the winter months.

Pathways to Housing D.C. offers housing services for people regardless of their situation or condition. Its “Housing First” teams house people directly from the streets, and then evaluate their mental and physical health, employment, addiction status, and education challenges to try to integrate them back into the community.

Covenant House is a homeless shelter for youth ages 18-24. They provide resources and shelter for youth “while empowering young people in their journey to independence and stability,” its website reads. Through its variety of programs, Friendship Place ended or prevented homelessness, found employment and provided life-changing services for more than 5,400 people. 

These groups have made a huge local difference with little resources, but Cunningham said there are more ways for people to support those experiencing homelessness if they’re strapped for time or money. Aside from donating and volunteering, she said even simply showing compassion toward people who are struggling can go a long way. 

Cunningham said compassion is something that’s been lost in the mainstream, with politicians and news anchors regularly directing hostile rhetoric toward homeless populations. But now more than ever, she said caring and understanding for fellow community members is key to moving forward and lifting those in need up.

“People sometimes feel invisible or that there’s a sense of hostility,” Cunningham said. “I think all of us can at least do that piece of recognizing people’s humanity.”

(This article is part of a national initiative exploring how geography, policy, and local conditions influence access to opportunity. Find more stories at economicopportunitylab.com.)

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. bar Rush facing eviction on charge of failing to pay rent

Landlord says $201,324 owed in back payments, late fees

Published

on

(Photo courtesy of Rush)

The owners of the building at 14th and U Streets, N.W. where D.C.’s newest LGBTQ bar and nightclub Rush opened on Dec. 5, 2025, filed a complaint in D.C. Superior Court on Feb. 3 seeking Rush’s eviction on grounds that the bar has failed to pay its required rent since last May.

According to the court filing by building owners Thomas and Ioanna Tsianakas Family Trust and Thomas Tsianakas Trustee, Rush owes $141,338.18 in back rent, $19,086.19 for utilities, and $40,900 in late fees, coming to a total of $201,324.37.

Rush owner Jackson Mosley didn’t immediately respond to a Feb. 5 phone message from the Washington Blade seeking comment on the court filing seeking his eviction from the building located at 200114th Street, N.W., with its entrance around the corner on U Street.   

WUSA 9 TV news reported in a Feb. 5 broadcast that Mosley said he “doesn’t see why the eviction notice is news and called it a ‘formality.’” The WUSA report adds that Mosley said he and the Rush landlord “have no bad blood” and if the action did reach the point of eviction he would file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to restructure the lease and his debts.

The eviction court filing follows a decision by the city’s Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Board on Dec. 17 to suspend Rush’s liquor license on grounds that its payment check for the liquor licensing fee was “returned unpaid.” The liquor board reissued the license three days later after Mosley paid the fee with another check

He told the Blade at the time that the first check did not “bounce,” as rumors in the community claimed. He said he made a decision to put a “hold” on the check so that Rush could change its initial decision to submit a payment for the license for three years and instead to arrange for a lower payment for just one year at a time.

Around that same time several Rush employees posted social media messages saying the staff was not paid for the bar’s first month’s pay period. Mosley responded by posting a message on the Rush website saying employees were not paid because of a “tax related mismatch between federal and District records,” which, among other things, involved the IRS.

“This discrepancy triggered a compliance hold within our payroll system,” his statement said. “The moment I became aware of the issue I immediately engaged our payroll provider and began working to resolve it,” he said.

 But WUSA 9 reports in its Feb. 5 broadcast about the eviction issue that at least some of the now former employees say they still have not been paid since their first paycheck failed to come on Dec. 15.   

Superior Court online records for the eviction case show that a “Remote Initial Hearing” for the case has been scheduled for March 30 before a Landlord & Tenant Judge.  

Continue Reading

Popular