Connect with us

District of Columbia

GLAA announces ratings for D.C. Council candidates

Janeese Lewis George, Robert White, Nate Fleming receive highest marks

Published

on

There are 10 candidates running to replace Vincent Gray who is not seeking re-election to the D.C. Council. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

GLAA D.C., formerly known as the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance of Washington, announced on May 13 that it has awarded its highest ratings for D.C. Council candidates running in the city’s June 4 primary election to incumbent Council members Janeese Lewis George (D-Ward 4) and Robert White (D-At-Large) and to Ward 7 Democratic candidate Nate Fleming.

On a rating scale of +10, the highest possible rating, to -10, the lowest rating, GLAA awarded ratings of +9.5 to Lewis George, + 9 to Robert White, and +8.5 to Fleming.

Fleming is one of 10 candidates running in the Democratic primary for the Ward 7 Council seat, which is being vacated by incumbent Council member and former D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray, who is not running for re-election. In addition to Fleming, GLAA issued ratings for seven other Ward 7 Democratic contenders who, like Fleming, returned a required GLAA candidate questionnaire.

The remaining two Ward 7 candidates were not rated under a GLAA policy adopted this year of not rating candidates that did not return the questionnaire, the responses to which GLAA uses to determine its ratings, according to GLAA President Tyrone Hanley. A statement accompanying the GLAA ratings shows that it rated 13 D.C. Council candidates – all Democrats —  out of a total of 18 Council candidates on the June 4 primary ballot.

Ballot information released by the D.C. Board of Elections shows that only one Republican candidate and one Statehood Green Party candidate is running this year for a  D.C. Council seat.  GOP activist Nate Derenge is running for the Ward 8 seat held by incumbent Democrat Trayon White and Statehood Green Party candidate Darryl Moch is running for the At-Large Council seat held by Robert White.

GLAA shows in its ratings statement that neither Trayon White nor Derenge nor Moch returned the questionnaire, preventing them from being rated. However, one of two Democratic candidates running against Tryon White in the primary — Salim Aldofo — did return the questionnaire and received a rating of +5.5. The other Democratic candidate, Rahman Branch, did not return the questionnaire and was not rated. Trayon White has been a supporter on LGBTQ issues while serving on the Council.

GLAA President Hanley said GLAA this year decided to limit its ratings to candidates of all political parties running for D.C. Council seats. In addition to candidates running for an At-Large Council seat and Council seats in Wards 4, 7, and 8, the June 4 primary ballot includes candidates running for the D.C. Congressional Delegate seat, the Shadow U.S. House seat, and the Shadow U.S. Senate seat. GLAA chose not to issue ratings for those races, according to Hanley. He said during mayoral election years, GLAA rates all candidates for mayor.

The Capital Stonewall Democrats, D.C’s largest local LGBTQ political organization,  was scheduled to release its endorsements of D.C. Council candidates and candidates for all other local D.C. races, including Congressional Delegate and Senate and House “shadow” races, at a May 21 endorsement event. The Blade will report on those endorsements in an upcoming story.

Like in all past years beginning in the early 1970s when GLAA began rating candidates in local D.C elections, the group has not rated federal candidates, including those running for U.S. president. Thus, it issued no rating this year for President Joe Biden and two lesser-known Democratic challengers appearing on the D.C. presidential primary ballot on June 4 – Marianne Williamson and Armando Perez-Serrato.

In the At-Large Council race, GLAA gave Robert White’s sole Democratic challenger, Rodney Red Grant, who returned the questionnaire, a rating of +3.5.

“The ratings are based solely on the issues and may not be interpreted as endorsements,” GLAA says in its statement accompanying the ratings. The statement says the ratings are based on the candidates’ response to the questionnaire, the questions for which GLAA says reflect the group’s positions on a wide range of issues as stated in a document it calls “A Loving Community: GLAA Policy Brief 2024.” It sends a link to that document to all candidates to whom it sends them the questionnaire and urges the candidate to seek out the brief “for guidance and clarification” in responding to the questions. GLAA says the ratings are also based on the candidates’ record on the issues GLAA deems of importance, including LGBTQ issues.

Like its questionnaire in recent years, this year’s nine-question questionnaire asks the candidates whether they would support mostly non-LGBTQ specific issues supported by GLAA, some of which are controversial. One of the questions asks the candidates, “Do you support enacting legislation to decriminalize sex work for adults, including the selling and purchasing of sex and third-party involvement not involving fraud, violence, and coercion?”

Another question asks if the candidates would support decriminalizing illegal drug use by supporting “removing the criminal penalties for drug possession for personal use and increasing investments in health services.” Other questions ask whether candidates would address “concentrated wealth in the District by raising revenue through taxing the most wealthy residents,” would they support funding for “harm reduction and overdose prevention services to save lives,” and would they support a Green New Deal for Housing bill pending before the D.C. Council that would “Socialize Our Housing” to address putting in place city subsidized housing for those in need.

One of the questions that might be considered LGBTQ specific asks whether candidates would support sufficient funding for the D.C. Office of Human Rights to ensure the office has enough staff members to adequately enforce the city’s nondiscrimination laws and to end a discrimination case backlog that the office sometimes encounters.

Some activists have criticized GLAA for not including more LGBTQ-specific questions in its questionnaire. Others have defended the questionnaire on grounds that D.C. long ago has passed a full range of LGBTQ supportive laws and most if not, all serious candidates running in D.C. for public office for the past 20 years or more have expressed strong support for LGBTQ equality. They argue that LGBTQ voters, while weighing the depth of support candidates have on LGBTQ issues, most of the time base their vote on a candidate’s record and position on non-LGBTQ issues when all candidates in a specific race are LGBTQ supportive.

Hanley told the Washington Blade GLAA believes the current questionnaire addresses the issues of importance to the largest number of LGBTQ D.C. residents.

“My response is that we care about whatever issues are impacting queer and trans people,” Hanley said. “We can’t isolate the challenges we are experiencing as queer and trans people to things that are specifically related to our identity as queer and trans people because they are all interconnected,” he said.

“So, how will I tell a Black trans woman we care about her not being discriminated against at her job for being trans, for being Black, or for being a woman, but we don’t care that she doesn’t have housing? Hanley asked. “To me, that seems like a very inhumane way of thinking about human beings because we are whole human beings,” he said, some of whom, he added, face a wide range of issues such as homelessness,  drug issues, and “struggling to make ends meet.”

The GLAA statement that accompanies its ratings, which is posted on its website, includes links to each of the candidates’ questionnaire responses as well as an explanation of why it gave its specific rating to each of the candidates. In its explanation section GLAA says all the candidates expressed overall support for the LGBTQ community and expressed support for the concerns  related to the issues raised by the questions even if they were not at this time ready to back some of the issues like decriminalization of sex work.  

Following are the GLAA ratings given to 12 Democratic D.C. Council candidates and one “unknown” candidate that Hanley says submitted their questionnaire but did not reveal their identity on the questionnaire:

DC Council At-Large

Robert White: +9

Rodney Red Grant: +3.5

DC Council Ward 4

Janeese Lewis George: +9.5

DC Council Ward 7

Ebony-Rose Thompson: +4.5

Ebony Payne: +5

Kelvin Brown: +2.5

Nate Fleming: +8.5

Roscoe Grant Jr.: +3.5

Veda Rasheed: +5

Villareal VJ Johnson II: +4

Wendell Felder: +2

DC Council Ward 8

Salim Aldofo: +5.5

Unknown: +2

The full GLAA ratings, a breakdown of the ratings based on a GLAA rating criteria, the candidate questionnaire response, and GLAA’s explanation for each of its candidate ratings can be accessed at the GLAA website.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

D.C. Council approves increased funding for Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs

Increase attached to 2027 budget bill

Published

on

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser at the 2024 Pride month flag raising ceremony at the Wilson Building. (Washington Blade photo by Emma Hanna)

The D.C. Council on July 14 gave final approval for the city’s fiscal year 2027 budget that includes an amendment calling for increasing the number and size of funding grants that the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs provides for local organizations providing services for the LGBTQ community.

The amendment, called the “LGBTQ Community Grant Amendment Act of 2026,” was introduced earlier this year by D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only gay member.

The D.C. LGBTQ Budget Coalition called the Parker amendment “a historic measure that establishes the District’s most sustainable model for a vehicle for investing in LGBTQ communities.”

The Council approved the version of the FY 2027 budget bill with the attached Parker amendment in its first of two required votes on June 9. Shortly after voting unanimously to give final approval of an earlier version of the two-part budget measure on July 7 that includes the Parker amendment, the Council sent the bill to Mayor Muriel Bowser for her signature.  

Bowser has expressed strong opposition to several provisions in the $22 billion budget measure passed by the Council that are unrelated to the Parker amendment regarding the Office of LGBTQ Affairs. The mayor has yet to say whether she will sign, veto, or choose not to sign the bill.

The latter option would allow the bill to become law if Congress does not choose to overturn it during its required 30-day legislative review period for all D.C. bills. Political observers believe the Council will vote to override a veto if Bowser chooses to veto the bill.

When contacted by the Washington Blade on July 22 to determine where the mayor stands on the budget bill, mayoral spokesperson Daniel Gleick said only, there was “no update on the budget just yet.”

Among other things, the Parker amendment calls for the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs to issue a $980,000 grant in FY 2027 to a private, nonprofit organization in partnership with the office “for the purpose of supporting programs that promote the welfare of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning community.”

It would allocate $680,000 of that funding total from existing funds from the city’s community affairs grants program and calls for $200,000 in newly appropriated funds.  

It says the organization selected would also initiate its own fundraising effort to expand the amount of funds beyond the amount the office would provide, enabling it to provide larger grants to a greater number of local LGBTQ organizations.

“The legislation arrives at a critical moment, as LGBTQ-serving organizations face unprecedented uncertainty,” the D.C. Budget Coalition said in its comment on the Parker amendment. “Growing demand for services is colliding with shrinking resources, federal attacks on LGBTQ programs, and ongoing threats to local funding streams,” the coalition’s statement says.

In what some observers have called a highly controversial action; the budget bill approved by the Council reverses and restores millions of dollars in budget cuts proposed by Bowser in the budget she submitted to the Council earlier this year.

Among other things, the Council’s budget preserves the current level of funding for housing vouchers, childcare, paid family leave, and other programs slated to be cut in the mayor’s proposed budget, according to a report by the Washington Post.

Bowser points out that the Council approved budget bill calls for using $150 million from the city’s reserve fund, which she and others have said could put the city in jeopardy in future years. The mayor has said the cuts were needed to prevent a major funding shortfall brought about by the action by Republicans in Congress to cut the city’s budget by over a billion dollars.     

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Is the Metro safe for riders?

WMATA says crime dropped 37 percent on system in 2025

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

I was inside Benning Road train station in April waiting for my train with two friends on the way to school. It usually took me 25-30 minutes to get from Benning Road Station to school at Congress Heights. As I waited for the train, I kept noticing that every train that got to five minutes away would disappear from the Metro screen before it got to my stop. 

I found out from one of my friends that a Metro work vehicle had crashed into a train at Metro Center and that all trains were now delayed. While my friends were able to call their family to pick them up, I had no such luxury. The train was my only option. It took me more than an hour to get to school. I missed my first period because of it and had to make up my work later in the day. I was marked absent because when a student misses one class, they’re marked absent for the day and an email is sent to their parents. I felt irritated knowing that I had to deal with all of these problems that weren’t even my fault due to an incident that happened on a different side of town. 

The incident at Metro Center isn’t the only incident that I have experienced on the subway. I have experienced kids fighting and almost pushing me on the tracks, massive delays because a woman was passed out on the train and Metro police pulling out their assault rifles and arresting someone in the station, which caused people to panic and start running.  

I later learned the crash that led to me being late to school caused 11 injuries to people who were on the train, according to media reports. And the Metro has experienced other dangerous incidents this year. A man was beaten so badly on Cinco de Mayo that he needed staples in his head and another man was beaten to death by a stranger at the Addison Road station

However, I’ve never experienced any incident that has led to me getting hurt, nor actually seen anyone get hurt.  

So, is the Metro safe? 

Metro experienced the lowest crime rate in its history in 2025, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority said. The crime rate decreased by 37 percent in 2025 compared to 2024. 

Last year, the Metro Transit Police Department increased enforcement efforts department-wide by more than 25 percent, Metro said. WMATA said it is in the process of installing upgraded video systems on our 6000 and 7000-series rail cars, which make up most of the cars in the system. This new camera system allows for live video access to rail cars from Metro’s Integrated Command and Communications Center.

Asked if he felt unsafe using the Metro, Dr. Aruna Rajam, a teacher at Bard High School Early College DC and George Washington University, recalled being on the train with a man who was smoking weed and yelling.  

“It didn’t turn physically violent, but it was alarming and made me feel like the situation could go sideways quickly,” said Rajam, who takes the train to both of his jobs, traveling day and night. 

Incidents like these are what make Rajam feel unsafe occasionally when he is riding the subway at night: “Late at night — like my 8:45 ride from Foggy Bottom to Springfield — it’s a different atmosphere.” 

Jayden Payne, a rising sophomore at Bard, worries even more. 

“There was a man who seemed intoxicated, moving around his phone, pretending it was a gun-all up in ladies’ faces,” he said in an interview. 

When asked if he would recommend the subway to others, he gave a firm “no” due to all of the incidents that he has heard about that have happened on the Metro. 

Erin Bray, who graduated from Bard in June, recalled an incident when a man brought a gun on the train when she was on it. Asked if she felt safe on the subway, Bray said: “No, because there’s not enough security and people keep bringing [weapons] on there.” 

Metro said it launched a Safety Risk Reduction Plan to improve riders’ safety and employs several other safety tactics, including Safe Passage patrols to help students in D.C. get to and from school safely. 

While all of the people interviewed said that they saw or experienced an uncomfortable incident, Metro said it is increasing its security and safety protocols. 

WMATA data coincides with what one of my interviewees said about his experience on Metro. 

“I feel safer now than I felt riding the Metro today than I did 10 years ago,” Dr. Samuel Slattery, a social science teacher at Bard High School Early College, said.  

He spoke of his experience with the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority subway in Philadelphia in comparison: “… That’s what an unsafe train system feels like,” Slattery said. 

The week before he was interviewed in May, Slattery said he was on SEPTA and there was a woman “eating beans off the floor of the train,” a homeless man “passed out in the middle of the train,” and a mentally ill woman yelling in his and other passengers’ faces that, “‘Jesus was watching her’ and the rest of us were in contact with demons.” This incident agitated Slattery so much that he said, “Screw this” to his friend and decided to pay extra for an Uber.

Metro riders who want to report an incident or safety concern can call Metro Transit Police (MTPD) at 202-961-2121 or text MYMTPD (696783). Metro also posts a daily Crime Blotter on its website where the public can see the calls MTPD responded to on a given day.  The Crime Blotter can be found here: https://www.wmata.com/about/transit-police/crime-stats.cfm 

Christian Jennings, a 2026 graduate of Bard High School Early College DC, is a rising freshman at North Carolina State University, where he plans to major in nuclear engineering. He worked with journalist-instructors at Youthcast Media Group on this article. 

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Wanda Alston Foundation announces passing of founding executive director Brian Watson

D.C. activist praised as “passionate advocate” for homeless LGBTQ youth

Published

on

Brian Watson in 2008. (Washington Blade photo by Henry Linser)

The Wanda Alston Foundation, which provides housing and support services for homeless LGBTQ youth in the D.C. metro area, announced on July 20 that its founding executive director, Brian Watson, has passed away.

In a statement the Alston Foundation called Watson “one of Washington, D.C.,’s most passionate advocates for LGBTQ+ youth experiencing homelessness.”

Neither the statement nor others who knew Watson have disclosed the cause of death or his age. Longtime LGBTQ community activist Rayceen Pendarvis said she heard only that Watson’s passing followed “a long time illness.”

“The origins of the Wanda Alston Foundation can be traced to a meeting convened by then-Mayor Anthony Williams at the request of Wanda Alston, the Mayor’s Director of LGBTQ Affairs,” the statement says.

“During that meeting, Brian spoke powerfully about the growing crisis of homelessness among LGBTQ+ youth in the District of Columbia and the urgent need for dedicated housing and support services,” it says. “His advocacy helped crystalize a vision that every young person deserves a safe place to call home.”

The statement points out that following Alston’s untimely death, Watson joined other community leaders “to transform that vision into reality by establishing the Wanda Alston Foundation in her memory.”

It says that today the Alston Foundation “proudly carries forward the mission Brian helped create by providing emergency and transitional housing, counseling, workforce development, life-skills training, and other supportive services that empower LGBTQ+ youth to achieve stability, independence, and hope for the future.”

Watson’s LinkedIn page says he served as executive director of the Alston Foundation from July 2013 to March 2014.  The Washington Blade reported in April 2014 that the Alston Foundation announced in a March 11, 2014, statement that Watson had resigned to “pursue other opportunities.”   

His LinkedIn page shows he worked for or with in a supporting role three local nonprofit organizations since leaving the Alston Foundation, including serving from February 2019 to November 2019 as a Methamphetamine Services Specialist for the D.C. group HIPS, which provides services for drug users and sex workers.

According to his LinkedIn page, from October 2014 to “present,” he also served as Chief Innovation Officer for the Propel Foundation, Inc., which he described as a “501c3 nonprofit organization founded in D.C. that works to strengthen nonprofit organizations through fiscal sponsorship and capacity building.”

A Facebook posting by his brother, Vidale Watson, says his family will be making arrangements for a memorial service and will share the date, time, and location once the details have been finalized.

“There are no words to describe the heartbreak our family is feeling,” Vidale Watson wrote. “While we are grateful for every prayer, kind word, and act of support we’ve received over the past week, this loss is still incredibly fresh.”

Continue Reading

Popular