District of Columbia
Proposed budget cut by DC Council called harmful to LGBTQ Pride events
Mayor’s office opposes elimination of Festival Fund
The D.C. Council Committee on Business and Economic Development voted on April 27 to approve a series of budget recommendations to the full Council that calls for cutting $1.5 million from a city program that has helped to support the city’s Capital Pride parade and festival.
The program in question, known as the Festival Fund or Special Event Relief Fund, has for many years exempted community-based organizations like the Capital Pride Alliance, from having to pay the costs of street closings and police and other public safety support services for such events.
The proposed cut for this program, if approved by the full D.C. Council, would be part of the city’s fiscal year 2024 budget.
Ryan Bos, executive director of Capital Pride Alliance, said elimination of the Festival Fund program could result in Capital Pride having to pay between $550,000 and $750,000 to hold the city’s popular Capital Pride Parade, Festival, Block Party, and other Pride events in 2024, when the elimination of the Festival Fund would take effect.
“This Fund is essential to supporting events that celebrate the culture of the District of Columbia and its communities, including events like the Capital Pride Celebration – particularly ahead of ensuring a successful World Pride in 2025,” according to a statement Capital Pride released to the Washington Blade.
“Elimination of the Fund may require that we look carefully at each event that we produce to determine where cuts to the budget may be needed,” the statement says. “It is important to note that events such as the Capital Pride Celebration generate significant revenue for the D.C. government,” the statement says.
In mentioning World Pride 2025, the statement was referring to the decision by leaders of the international LGBTQ event known as World Pride, to select D.C. and the Capital Pride Alliance to host the 2025 World Pride in June of that year. Hundreds of thousands of visitors from foreign countries as well as from the host country usually attend Word Pride events.
It couldn’t immediately be determined how the elimination of the city’s Festival Fund would impact the D.C. 2025 World Pride, but the Capital Pride statement suggests the elimination of the fund could dramatically increase the costs for putting it on.
A May 9 press release issued by the office of D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser expresses opposition to the Council committee’s proposed $1.5 million cut in the Festival Fund budget and the committee’s proposed cuts of $3 million each for two other programs that the release says have supported community-based businesses.
One of them is called the Great Streets and Small Business Fund and the other is known as the Food Access Fund, which supports restaurants in Wards 7 and 8, according to the mayor’s press release.
“Last week, the Council proposed cuts to these three programs, including the elimination of the Festival Fund,” the press release says.
These and multiple other budget-related proposals by the Committee on Business and Economic Development are outlined in detail in a 96-page draft report released on April 27. The report says the committee voted 4-0 to approve the report and its proposals, with one member of the committee — Council member Anita Bonds (D-At-Large) — being absent when the vote was taken.
Those voting yes included Council member Kenyan McDuffie (I-At Large), who chairs the committee, and Council members Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2), Charles Allen (D-Ward 6), and Vincent Gray (D-Ward 7).
D.C. gay activist John Fanning, who serves as Bonds’s director of constituent services, said Bonds opposes the proposed $1.5 million cut in the Festival Fund budget and plans to urge her fellow Council members to remove the proposed cut from the Council’s final budget proposal.
Fanning said Bonds was absent for the committee vote because she was attending a budget markup hearing at the same time for the Council’s Committee on Executive Administration and Labor for which Bonds is the chairperson.
According to Fanning, Bonds is aware of the importance of the Festival Fund’s support for events like Capital Pride and other events, including the Cherry Blossom Festival, the H Street Festival, the Fiesta DC Hispanic event, and an event called Porchfest.
“Council member Bonds also had concerns that any cancellations of festivals and events would impact the connectivity of people, after several years of isolation during the pandemic,” Fanning said.
Spokespersons for McDuffie and fellow committee members Allen, Pinto, and Gray didn’t immediately respond to a request by the Blade for comment on why they supported the proposed $1.5 million cut in the Festival Fund.
“The Capital Pride Alliance has reached out to the [Council] Chair and all members of the City Council to encourage them to object to this budget cut,” the Capital Pride statement to the Blade says.
The Council’s Committee of the Whole, which consists of all 13 Council members, and that is chaired by Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large), was expected to consider, and possibly vote on, all Council committee budget proposals on May 16.
Later in the day on Thursday, May 11, after the Blade posted this story, Councilmember McDuffie responded to Blade’s earlier request for comment on why he and his fellow committee members voted to cut the $1.5 million Festival Fund.
“As a former civil rights attorney and current champion for equity and inclusion on the Council, I support the Pride Parade and appreciate its mission to fight for equality and honor the history of the LGBTQ+ community,” McDuffie told the Blade in a short statement.
But McDuffie said members of the Committee on Business and Economic Development made the difficult decision to make “deep cuts to several programs” to offset what he said was Mayor Bowser’s decision to defund in her proposed budget the Child Wealth Building Act or Baby Bonds program.
That program, McDuffie points out, is designed to “help close the racial wealth gap in our city by investing in children born into poverty” and providing financial support upon their turning 18 years of age to help pay, among other things, for education and purchasing a home.
“I am working with the Council Chairman to identify any available funds to support the Festival Fund,” McDuffie said.
In a separate response to a Blade inquiry, a spokesperson for Council Chair Mendelson said Mendelson is aware of the committee’s decision to cut the Festival Fund and he is looking for a way to restore that funding in his budget proposal. The spokesperson, Lindsey Walton, said Mendelson plans to release his budget proposal on Monday, May 15.
District of Columbia
‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case
Sean Charles Dunn faced misdemeanor charge
A jury with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, Nov. 6, found D.C. resident Sean Charles Dunn not guilty of assault for tossing a hero sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10.
Dunn’s attorneys hailed the verdict as a gesture of support for Dunn’s contention that his action, which was captured on video that went viral on social media, was an exercise of his First Amendment right to protest the federal border agent’s participating in President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal troops on D.C. streets.
Friends of Dunn have said that shortly before the sandwich tossing incident took place Dunn had been at the nearby gay nightclub Bunker, which was hosting a Latin dance party called Tropicoqueta. Sabrina Shroff, one of three attorneys representing Dunn at the trial, said during the trial after Dunn left the nightclub he went to the submarine sandwich shop on 14th Street at the corner of U Street, where he saw the border patrol agent and other law enforcement officers standing in front of the shop.
Shroff and others who know Dunn have said he was fearful that the border agent outside the sub shop and immigrant agents might raid the Bunker Latin night event. Bunker’s entrance is on U Street just around the corner from the sub shop where the federal agents were standing.
“I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything happening,“ Dunn told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict while joined by his attorneys. “And that night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants,” he said.
“And let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he continued. “That means from many, one. Every life matters no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”
The verdict followed a two-day trial with testimony by just two witnesses, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent Gregory Lairmore, who identified Dunn as the person who threw the sandwich at his chest, and Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who told the jury she witnessed Dunn toss the sandwich at Lairmore while shouting obscenities.
Shroff told the jury Dunn was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and that the tossing of the sandwich at Lairmore, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, did not constitute an assault under the federal assault law to which Dunn was charged, among other things, because the federal agent was not injured.
Prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge. But the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.
“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” the criminal complaint states, “pointing his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”
The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1.
Prosecutors repeatedly played the video of the incident for the jurors on video screens in the courtroom.
Dunn, who chose not to testify at his trial, and his attorneys have not disputed the obvious evidence that Dunn threw the sandwich that hit Lairmore in the chest. Lead defense attorney Shroff and co-defense attorneys Julia Gatto and Nicholas Silverman argued that Dunn’s action did not constitute an assault under the legal definition of common law assault in the federal assault statute.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo, the lead prosecutor in the case, strongly disputed that claim, citing various provisions in the law and appeals court rulings that he claimed upheld his and the government’s contention that an “assault” can take place even if a victim is not injured as well as if there was no physical contact between the victim and an alleged assailant, only a threat of physical contact and injury.
The dispute over the intricacies of the assault law and whether Dunn’s action reached the level of an assault under the law dominated the two-day trial, with U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, who presided over the trial, weighing in with his own interpretation of the assault statute. Among other things, he said it would be up to the jury to decide whether or not Dunn committed an assault.
Court observers have said in cases like this, a jury could have issued a so-called “nullification” verdict in which they acquit a defendant even though they believe he or she committed the offense in question because they believe the charge is unjust. The other possibility, observers say, is the jury believed the defense was right in claiming a law was not violated.
DiLorenzo and his two co-prosecutors in the case declined to comment in response to requests by reporters following the verdict.
“We really want to thank the jury for having sent back an affirmation that his sentiment is not just tolerated but it is legal, it is welcome,” defense attorney Shroff said in referring to Dunn’s actions. “And we thank them very much for that verdict,” she said.
Dunn thanked his attorneys for providing what he called excellent representation “and for offering all of their services pro bono,” meaning free of charge.
Dunn, an Air Force veteran who later worked as an international affairs specialist at the U.S. Department of Justice, was fired from that job by DOJ officials after his arrest for the sandwich tossing incident.
“I would like to thank family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional, or spiritual, or artistic, or financial,” he told the gathering outside the courthouse. “To the people that opened their hearts and homes to me, I am eternally grateful.”
“As always, we accept a jury’s verdict; that is the system within which we function,” CNN quoted U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro as saying after the verdict in the Dunn case. “However, law enforcement should never be subjected to assault, no matter how ‘minor,’” Pirro told CNN in a statement.
“Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another,” CNN quoted her as saying.
District of Columbia
Trial begins for man charged with throwing sandwich at federal agent
Jury views video of incident that went viral on social media
Prosecutors showed jurors a video of Sean Charles Dunn throwing a sub sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the bustling intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10 of this year on the opening day of Dunn’s trial that has drawn national attention.
According to a knowledgeable source, Dunn threw the sandwich at the agent after shouting obscenities at him and other federal law enforcement officers who were stationed at that location after he was refused admission to the nearby gay bar Bunker for being too intoxicated.
Charging documents and reports by witnesses show that Dunn expressed outrage that the federal officers were stationed there and at other locations in D.C. under orders from President Donald Trump to help curtail crime in the city.
Prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge, but the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.
“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” a criminal complaint states, “pointed his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”
The complaint adds, “Dunn continued his conduct for several minutes before crossing the street and continuing to yell obscenities at V-1. At approximately 11:06 p.m. Dunn approached V-1 and threw a sandwich at him, striking V-1 in the chest.”
The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1.”
At the opening day of testimony at the trial on Tuesday, Nov. 4, V-1, who was identified as Customs and Border Patrol Agent Gregory Lairmore, testified as the first government witness. Also testifying was Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who said she was present at the scene and saw Dunn throw the sandwich at Lairmore.
The position taken by Dunn’s defense attorneys is outlined in a 24-page memorandum in support of a motion filed on Oct. 15 calling for the dismissal of the case, which was denied by U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols.
“This prosecution is a blatant abuse of power,” the defense memo states. “The federal government has chosen to bring a criminal case over conduct so minor it would be comical – were it not for the unmistakable retaliatory motive behind it and the resulting risk to Mr. Dunn.”
It adds, “Mr. Dunn tossed a sandwich at a fully armed, heavily protected Customs and Border Protection {CBP} officer. That act alone would never have drawn a federal charge. What did was the political speech that accompanied it.”
The trial was scheduled to resume at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, Nov. 5.
District of Columbia
D.C. mayor announces use of local funds for SNAP food aid
Md., Va. arrange for similar local replacement of federal money
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser announced on Oct. 30 that she has arranged for at least $129 million in local D.C funds to be used to support as many as 141,000 D.C. residents in need who depend on the federal food assistance programs known as SNAP and WIC whose funding will be cut off beginning Nov. 1 due to the federal shutdown.
SNAP, which stands for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and WIC, the Women, Infants, and Children Program, provide food related services for 10 million or more people in need nationwide.
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, and Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer also announced similar plans to provide emergency state funds to replace the federal funds cut off beginning Nov. 1 for the two food programs.
Similar to Bowser, Moore and Youngkin said their replacement funds at this time would only last for the month of November. Each said they were hopeful that Congress would end the shutdown before the end of November.
“We know that SNAP and WIC play a critical role in keeping thousands of Washingtonians and millions of Americans put food on the table each month,” Bowser said in a statement. “We were hopeful it wouldn’t come to this – and we will need the federal government to reopen as soon as possible – but for right now, we’re moving forward to ensure we take care of D.C. residents in November,” she said.
The mayor’s statement says about 85,000 D.C. households, consisting of 141,000 individuals, receive SNAP support each month, with an average monthly allocation of $314. It says more than 12,500 city residents in 8,300 households benefit from the WIC program.
A spokesperson for the D.C. Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs couldn’t immediately be reached to determine whether the city has an estimated count of how many LGBTQ residents receive support from the SNAP and SIC programs.
-
District of Columbia2 days ago‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case
-
Sports2 days agoGay speedskater racing toward a more inclusive future in sports
-
Celebrity News4 days agoJonathan Bailey is People’s first openly gay ‘Sexiest Man Alive’
-
Michigan4 days agoFBI thwarts Halloween terror plot targeting Mich. LGBTQ bars
