Living
Maryland Senate kills trans rights bill
More disappointment for activists; Miller blamed for failures

Sen. Brian Frosh (D-Montgomery County), a supporter of the trans rights bill, disagreed with those who accuse Senate President Mike Miller of orchestrating the measure's defeat. (Blade photo by Michael Key)
A gay member of the Maryland State Senate issued a strongly worded statement criticizing his colleagues for voting 27-20 on Monday to send a transgender non-discrimination bill back to committee, an action that killed the bill for the year.
Sen. Richard Madaleno (D-Montgomery County), one of the lead sponsors and longtime supporters of the Gender Identity Non-Discrimination Act, known as HB 235, joined LGBT activists in expressing outrage over the Senate’s action.
“Every homeless transgender person that dies on the street will do so because of the Senate’s failure to pass HB 235,” Madaleno said in a statement released late Monday.
“Every transgender individual who cannot provide for themselves or their family because they are denied employment based on their gender identity will do so because of the Senate’s failure to pass HB 235,” he said.
The bill, which calls for banning discrimination against transgender people in the areas of employment, housing and credit, including bank loans, had been approved last month in the state’s House of Delegates by a vote of 86 to 52.
Initial head counts of senators led supporters to believe they had the votes to pass the measure in the Senate. But activists working with the statewide LGBT group Equality Maryland said that, to their great disappointment and surprise, as many as seven Democrats backed off from earlier commitments to vote for the bill.
Of the 27 senators voting to send the bill back to committee, 16 were Democrats and 11 were Republicans. Democrats hold a 35 to 12 majority in the Senate.
Of the 20 voting against the motion to send the bill to committee, 19 were Democrats. Just one Republican, LGBT rights supporter Allan Kittleman of Howard and Carroll Counties, voted against the motion to send the bill back to committee.
“Of the ones that voted to recommit, there were at least seven that we felt had committed to us that they were going to support this and then they backed out,” said Dana Beyer, a Montgomery County transgender activist and former House of Delegates candidate who worked closely with Equality Maryland to lobby for the bill.
“It’s always a guess,” said Beyer, when asked why supporters turned against the bill. “It’s shocking because we didn’t expect this. There are a thousand ways to kill a bill. This is one way to do it and I have to lay it at the hands of the Senate leadership.”
Beyer and others familiar with the bill said they believe Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller (D-Prince George’s and Calvert Counties), orchestrated the bill’s demise.
Miller was among the senators who voted for the motion to recommit the bill to the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, which voted 7-4 one day earlier to approve the bill and send it to the Senate floor.
Miller did not return a call seeking comment as of press time on Wednesday.
Sen. Brian Frosh (D-Montgomery County), chair of the Judicial Proceedings Committee and a supporter of the bill who voted against sending it back to committee, disagreed with those who blame Miller for killing the bill.
“I’m sorry that it lost,” Frosh told the Blade in an interview Tuesday. “But I think the president said a week ago publicly, and he had been saying all session, that there aren’t the votes on the Senate floor to pass it. And he was right.”
Added Frosh: “There were 20 votes for the bill. You need 24. And it’s a shame, but it’s a fact of life.”
According to Frosh, Equality Maryland has repeatedly miscalculated the vote count on the Gender Identity Non-Discrimination Act this year and in previous years, when the bill died in committee.
Frosh said he is doubtful that supporters would be able to line up the four votes they need to pass the bill next year.
Beyer disputes Frosh’s assessment, saying that Equality Maryland and others obtained clear commitments from senators who voted to send the transgender bill back to committee on Monday.
“It wasn’t just Equality Maryland that was doing the vote count,” she said. “There was a coalition of people that had personal relationships with various senators who got commitments from those senators.”
Miller, for reasons not fully understood by the bill’s supporters, “twisted arms” to get Democratic senators supportive of the bill to vote for the motion to recommit to committee, Beyer said. She said she and others associated with Equality Maryland confirmed this from reliable sources close to the Senate that she declined to identify due to promises of confidentiality.
Miller became the target of an aggressive campaign by Equality Maryland and a coalition of transgender activists and allies organized by Beyer after he diverted the bill to the Senate Rules Committee following its approval by the House of Delegates.
The Rules Committee has long been viewed as a “graveyard” for bills out of favor with the Senate leadership. Activists backing the bill viewed Miller’s decision to single out the transgender bill for diversion to the Rules Committee while clearing dozens of other bills for the normal route to standing committees as an attempt to kill the bill.
But in a development that Annapolis political observers viewed as rare, Miller backed down amid a barrage of e-mails and phone calls to his office and to the offices of other senators demanding that the bill be released to the Judicial Proceedings Committee for a vote.
The Judicial Proceedings panel voted April 8, following a 90-minute debate, to approve the bill and send it to the Senate floor. The committee’s action led supporters to believe they had a fighting chance to see it through a full Senate vote.
Morgan Meneses-Sheets, Equality Maryland’s executive director, said she was especially disappointed that several senators that voted to recommit the bill to committee on Monday had assured the group of their support for the measure.
“I wish I had a why,” she said. “This means that we really need to examine our steps moving forward. But I must emphasize that we got so far this year,” she added, noting that the bill was killed in committee for the past four years without ever reaching the floor of the Senate or House.
“We are thankful to every legislator who did do the right thing,” she said. “We are so thankful to every constituent who wrote a letter and made a phone call, and especially to the transgender people of Maryland who came out and told their stories, who shared their very personal need for job and housing protections.”
“We will continue to fight every day. We will continue to analyze how we can get these important protections in place. But we are shocked and frankly appalled by this action today,” she added.
The vote by the Senate came on the last day of the Maryland Legislature’s 2011 session and followed less than 15 minutes of debate.
Sen. C. Anthony Muse (D-Prince George’s County) asked whether the bill would have an impact on private citizens seeking to choose a roommate in a private home. Muse also asked whether the bill’s proposed ban on employment discrimination would force the Boy Scouts organization to hire a transgender person or prevent any employer from establishing a dress code.
Sen. Jamie Raskin (D-Montgomery County), one of the lead sponsors and supporters of the bill served as floor manager for what was expected to be a lengthy Senate floor debate. Raskin told Muse the bill would not cover people in private homes looking for roommates.
“If you’re looking for a roommate, you can discriminate on any basis you want,” he said.
Raskin said the bill would cover the Boy Scouts organization for employment purposes, but said a transgender person seeking a job with the Boy Scouts would have to meet all other requirements for the job, including appropriate dress codes. He said the Boy Scouts, like any other employer, could not refuse to hire someone solely because of their status as a transgender person under the bill’s provisions.
Immediately after Muse and Raskin completed their exchange, Sen. James DeGrange (D-Anne Arundel County) offered a motion to recommit the bill to committee.
“I respect the work the committee’s done on this bill,” he said. “I know there’s a huge concern in this body toward this. To that I’d like to move that the bill be re-referred back to committee.”
Raskin and Sen. Catherine Pugh (D-Baltimore City) rose to oppose the motion, urging their colleagues to give supporters a chance to vote on the bill.
“It’s been way whittled down,” said Raskin in describing how the bill’s public accommodations provision was removed by House supporters to ease concerns by lawmakers hesitant to vote for the bill.
“This is just about giving people the right to live someplace and the right to earn a living,” he said.
Miller, presiding over the Senate, then called for a recorded roll-call vote on the motion. When the Senate chamber’s electronic board showed the motion had passed by a 27-20 vote, expressions of shock could be heard in the chamber, especially by supporters seated in the visitors gallery.
The bill’s defeat represented a victory for an odd coalition of opponents.
A faction of transgender activists, led by the group Trans Maryland, called on the Senate to kill the bill because it did not go far enough. The group said a decision to take out a provision protecting transgender persons from public accommodations discrimination – which includes stores, hotels and public bathrooms, among other places – made the bill unacceptable.
The bill’s supporters said they reluctantly agreed to a decision by the bill’s chief sponsor in the House, Del. Joseline Pena-Melnyk (D-Prince George’s and Anne Arundel Counties), to remove a public accommodations provision from the previous year’s version of the bill. Pena-Melnyk said doing so was the only way the measure could have cleared a House committee and have any chance of passing either body.
The anti-LGBT group Maryland Citizens for A Responsible Government led efforts among conservative religious and political groups to oppose the bill on grounds that no transgender civil rights protections should be enacted. The group’s leader, physician Ruth Jacobs, organized telephone and e-mail campaigns targeting lawmakers that vowed to bring the issue up in the next election.
The transgender bill’s defeat followed by a little more than a month the defeat in the Maryland Legislature of a same-sex marriage bill that drew national media coverage. In what some in the LGBT community have viewed as an ironic twist, the marriage bill died after the Senate approved it and the House of Delegates sent it back to committee rather than take a full up or down vote on the measure.
In the case of the marriage bill, a coalition of LGBT groups, including Equality Maryland, favored sending it back to committee after determining they did not have the votes in the House to pass it and it would be better to avoid a losing vote.
Some in the LGBT community disagreed with that decision. But in the case of the transgender bill, nearly all of its supporters, including Equality Maryland, wanted the Senate to vote on the measure.
Beyer said her sources close to the Senate believe it would have passed had Miller and the Senate leadership agreed to allow it to come up for a full vote.
“He twisted enough arms to send it back to committee but he couldn’t get enough people to vote no on the bill itself,” she said. “That’s what we’re being told by people in the know.”
Madeleno could not be immediately reached to determine if he agrees with Beyer’s assessment of Miller’s role in the bill’s defeat.
But Annapolis observers believe Madaleno made it clear in the strongly worded statement he released on Monday that he was angry at Miller, even though he did not mention the Senate president by name.
“I am extremely disappointed by the Senate’s action today to send HB 235 back to the Judicial Proceedings Committee,” Madaleno said in the statement.
“The twisted and unfair process HB 235 had to go through to even make it to the Senate floor mars the Senate’s otherwise outstanding work this year,” he said. “The Senate’s treatment of this legislation will be remembered for a long time by the LGBT community and Marylanders who believe in equal rights for all.”
Madaleno said he plans to introduce a new version of the bill next year that will include a public accommodations provision.
Real Estate
The financial realities facing LGBTQ+ first-time buyers
Beyond affordability: credit, support systems, and trust
For many first-time buyers, the conversation starts with affordability: home prices, interest rates, monthly payments, and the down payment. Yet these initial figures represent only part of the picture. For LGBTQ+ first-time buyers, credit history, access to financial support, household structure, and whether the professionals involved feel trustworthy can also shape the path to homeownership. While these hurdles affect various demographics and show up differently for everyone, they often create friction long before an offer is submitted.
Affordability Is Only the First Filter
A buyer may be able to handle a monthly mortgage payment and still struggle to qualify for the loan they expected. Loan approval hinges on a holistic review that goes far beyond basic income. Lenders generally consider credit history, debt obligations, available cash, employment and income documentation, and the buyer’s overall financial profile. That distinction matters for first-time buyers who have spent years paying rent successfully but have a limited credit file, uneven credit history, student loan balances, or other debt. Even renters with flawless track records of managing monthly payments can run into unexpected hurdles when a lender applies standard underwriting criteria. Early preparation can help. By auditing credit reports, resolving discrepancies, tackling existing debt, accumulating savings, and engaging early with a certified loan officer, buyers can catch and fix vulnerabilities before they derail a deal.
Support Systems Can Change What Is Possible
Homebuying advice often assumes that first-time buyers have access to a familiar financial safety net: parents who can help with a down payment, relatives who can provide a gift, or family members who can explain the process because they have purchased homes before. That support is not universal. Some LGBTQ+ buyers have strong financial and emotional support from their families of origin. Others turn to partners, close friends, trusted mentors, or chosen family for backing, while some navigate the entire venture independently. The important point is not to assume what a buyer’s support system looks like. The difference can be practical. When family assistance isn’t an option, buyers often need more time to build reserves. They may rely heavily on down-payment assistance programs or specialized loan options offered by their lender. A buyer receiving gift funds may need to understand documentation requirements before using those funds. Support also includes knowledge. Those raised around property owners often enter the process with a baseline understanding of key mechanics like earnest money, home inspections, appraisals, closing fees, and mortgage terminology. A first-generation buyer may be learning it all at once. Lacking that foundational awareness can lead to costly mistakes surrounding critical deadlines, hidden fees, and contractual obligations.
Household Structure Deserves Careful Planning
LGBTQ+ buyers may purchase alone, with a spouse, with an unmarried partner, or in another shared household arrangement. These varying arrangements change the game for mortgage applications, combined credit assessments, titling methods, and the division of ongoing home equity. Those decisions deserve deliberate attention. Because two co-buyers may have vastly different credit standings, putting both names on a mortgage application isn’t always the best route. Mortgage responsibility and legal ownership are related, but not identical. A first-time buyer should be able to ask these questions without feeling awkward about explaining a relationship, correcting assumptions, or wondering whether a professional understands the household in front of them. If legal or tax complications surface, buyers should seek tailored advice from an independent professional.
Trust Is a Financial Issue, Too
Trust can sound like a “soft” consideration compared with a credit score or closing-cost estimate. In reality, it directly shapes strategic financial choices at every stage of the transaction. A buyer who doesn’t feel comfortable with an agent or lender may hesitate to disclose concerns, ask basic questions, or admit they don’t understand a term. They might hold back on detailing how they plan to co-own a home with a partner, or unquestioningly agree to costs without fully grasping the long-term impact. That is a poor foundation for a major financial commitment. First-time buyers need professionals who explain the process clearly, respect the buyer’s household and identity, and make room for questions without judgment. High-level skill and deep market knowledge remain essential, but clear communication and accountability are equally vital. Buyers should understand who each professional represents, what that professional is responsible for, and when outside legal, tax, insurance, or financial advice may be appropriate.
A Better First Step Is Better Information
The financial realities of buying a first home extend well beyond the list price. A buyer’s credit profile determines loan availability, while their support network dictates their financial wiggle room and access to guidance. Household structure can affect borrowing and ownership decisions. Ultimately, trust is what empowers a buyer to speak up, ask tough questions, and safeguard their financial well-being. For LGBTQ+ buyers, an affirming experience should not replace professional expertise. True support requires both identity-affirming care and top-tier professional guidance working in tandem. Pride Real Estate Connections was built from lived experience with exclusion in real estate and connects LGBTQ+ buyers, sellers, families, and allies with independent real estate professionals through its referral network. The goal is simple: connect clients with vetted agents and lenders who offer unconditional respect, deep expertise, and a space where no one has to minimize who they are. Buying a first home is already complex. Buyers deserve the clarity to focus on core choices: managing their budget, structuring ownership, navigating tradeoffs, and relying on advisors who truly have their back. Pride REC is a referral and connection platform, not a brokerage, and independent real estate professionals provide their own services. Buyers must execute their own due diligence and partner with accredited legal, tax, and lending specialists tailored to their unique needs.
Devin Schaff is co-founder of Pride Real Estate Connections.
Real Estate
Factors to consider when hiring an interior designer
It’s essential to have confidence in the professionals you engage
(StatePoint) Ready to redesign your home? Whether you have only a vague notion of how you want your spaces to look or a very specific vision, relying on the expertise of a professional can help you bring your dream home to life. Before choosing and hiring an interior designer, though, be sure to take the following factors into consideration:
Style: Identify your style. Is it boho chic? Industrial? Maximalist? Many designers have their own signature look and preferences. It’s best to understand what vibe you want first, then search for a designer who aligns with that style.
Past client projects: One of the best ways to know whether a particular designer is the right fit for you is to review their past client projects. Ask to see their portfolio or review their finished projects on their website or socials. Also, take a look at reviews and testimonials to ensure their previous customers walked away satisfied with a job well done.
Budget: Communicate your budget in advance of work to confirm that you and your designer are on the same page financially. Your decorator will need this ballpark figure to get a handle on the scope of the project and to make design decisions accordingly. You should also use this conversation to understand their rates so you can decide whether you want to move forward.
Preferred vendors: It’s important that the interior designer you choose has preferred vendors that they work with. These are partners they’ve built strong relationships with that provide the same first-rate experience they do, and have streamlined processes in place. “A home renovation has so many moving parts. That’s why we try to take the hassle out of the process for designers and homeowners alike,” says Katie Zess, senior marketing manager and director of Renewal by Andersen’s Interior Designer Loyalty Program.
Through the loyalty program, the full-service window and door replacement division of Andersen Corporation offers their program members exclusive access and rewards, including a “designer discount” they can share with their clients. Renewal by Andersen also offers designers a dedicated point of contact to ensure a smooth process that’s customized for your project from start to finish. To learn more, visit renewalbyandersen.com.
Before you begin your home renovation, it’s essential to have confidence in the professionals you hire. Be sure your interior designer has fostered partnerships that will streamline your redesign, and that their goals and budget aligns with yours.
Real Estate
The LGBTQ real estate map is being redrawn
Affordability, higher mortgage rates reshaping where we choose to call home
For decades, the map of LGBTQ+ America was relatively easy to recognize.
New York. San Francisco. Los Angeles. Palm Springs. Provincetown. Fort Lauderdale and Wilton Manors.
These communities became LGBTQ+ destinations because they offered something that wasn’t always easy to find elsewhere: visibility, acceptance, community and the freedom to live openly.
But that map is changing.
Today’s LGBTQ+ homebuyers are navigating a housing market defined by high prices, elevated mortgage rates and affordability challenges. At the same time, remote and hybrid work, retirement and the growth of LGBTQ+ communities beyond traditional destinations are giving buyers more choices about where to live.
Increasingly, the question isn’t simply, “Where are the most LGBTQ-friendly places to live?”
It’s also: “Where can I find community and afford the life I want?”
That shift may become one of the defining LGBTQ+ real estate trends of the coming decade.
Affordability Is Changing the Conversation
For many buyers, the biggest issue in today’s housing market is simple: the monthly payment.
The average 30-year fixed mortgage rate was 6.95% in mid-September, compared with 6.26% a year earlier, according to Freddie Mac.
Meanwhile, the median price of an existing U.S. home reached $429,100 in August, according to the National Association of Realtors.
The combination of elevated home prices and higher borrowing costs has changed what many Americans can afford—and where they can afford it.
Some buyers are purchasing smaller homes or condominiums. Others are moving farther from major urban centers. Still others are reconsidering expensive markets entirely.
For LGBTQ+ buyers, this is helping broaden the definition of an LGBTQ+-friendly place to call home.
LGBTQ+ Buyers Have More Choices
A generation ago, relocating away from a major city or established gay neighborhood could sometimes mean sacrificing access to a visible LGBTQ+ community.
That’s increasingly less true.
Traditional LGBTQ+ destinations such as Palm Springs, Fort Lauderdale and Wilton Manors, San Francisco, New York and Provincetown remain important centers of LGBTQ+ life. But today, LGBTQ+ buyers can also find established or growing communities in cities across the country.
Places such as Minneapolis, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Richmond, Atlanta and the Tampa Bay area are among the markets attracting buyers who may be looking for a different balance of housing costs, lifestyle and community.
The goal isn’t necessarily to find the cheapest house.
It’s to find the right combination of affordability, LGBTQ+ community, lifestyle, employment opportunities, healthcare, culture and quality of life.
Remote and hybrid work have expanded those possibilities for some buyers. If a job no longer requires being in an expensive employment center five days a week, the geographic search for a home can become considerably larger.
That can make communities that once seemed impractical suddenly worth considering.
Retirement Is Redrawing the Map, Too
Retirement is another important part of the changing LGBTQ+ real estate landscape.
As more Americans reach retirement age, LGBTQ+ retirees are considering where they want to spend the next chapter of their lives. Housing costs, taxes, healthcare, climate and proximity to airports, restaurants and cultural activities all play a role.
But LGBTQ+ retirees may have additional questions.
Will I feel comfortable living openly?
Is there an LGBTQ+ community nearby?
Can I find LGBTQ+-affirming healthcare?
Will I have opportunities to build a social network as I get older?
Those considerations can make choosing a retirement destination particularly personal.
Palm Springs and Fort Lauderdale/Wilton Manors remain well-known LGBTQ+ retirement destinations. But retirees are also exploring smaller cities and communities across the Southeast, Midwest and other regions where housing costs and lifestyles can look very different.
For many, the search is becoming less about moving to a famous gay destination and more about finding a place where community, lifestyle and affordability intersect.
Buyers Finally Have More Leverage
There is another significant change in today’s housing market: buyers have regained some negotiating power.
The National Association of Realtors reported 1.62 million existing homes for sale in August, up 5.9% from a year earlier. That represents approximately 4.9 months of housing supply, the highest level in more than a decade.
Realtor.com also reported that 20.4% of active listings had experienced a price reduction in August.
That’s a very different environment from the pandemic-era housing market, when buyers in many communities faced bidding wars, waived inspections and offers well above asking price.
Depending on the market, today’s buyer may have more time to evaluate a property and greater opportunity to negotiate price, repairs, closing costs or other concessions.
But there is an important caveat: there is no single national housing market.
Conditions can vary dramatically from one city—or even one neighborhood—to another. Some markets remain competitive, while others have considerably more inventory and negotiating room.
That’s one reason local expertise matters.
Sellers Need a Different Strategy
The changing market also has implications for LGBTQ+ homeowners considering selling.
Strategies that worked several years ago may not work today.
Buyers are highly sensitive to monthly payments, and an overpriced home can quickly be passed over when competing properties are available.
Sellers should pay close attention not only to recent comparable sales but also to homes currently competing for the same buyer.
Condition matters, too.
Repairs, landscaping, staging and professional photography can make a meaningful difference when buyers have more choices. Pricing correctly from the beginning has also become increasingly important.
More Than 30 Years Serving the LGBTQ+ Community
One part of buying or selling a home hasn’t changed: the importance of working with a real estate professional who understands your priorities.
For more than 30 years, GayRealEstate.com has served the LGBTQ+ community, connecting buyers and sellers with LGBTQ+ and allied real estate professionals throughout the United States.
Over that time, the GayRealEstate.com network has supported more than $2 billion in real estate sales and more than 55,000 transactions.
Behind those numbers are thousands of people making one of life’s most personal decisions: where to call home.
For LGBTQ+ buyers, that conversation can involve much more than bedrooms, bathrooms and price per square foot. It can include community, acceptance, healthcare, family, retirement, lifestyle and the ability to live openly.
An experienced LGBTQ+ or allied real estate professional can understand why those considerations belong in the real estate conversation.
Finding Home in a Changing America
The 2026 housing market presents real challenges.
Mortgage rates remain elevated. Home prices are high. Affordability continues to strain buyers across much of the country.
But there are also signs of a more balanced market. Inventory has increased. Price reductions have become more common. Buyers in many markets have regained negotiating power.
And for LGBTQ+ Americans, something else has changed: there are more places to consider calling home.
The next great LGBTQ+ destination doesn’t necessarily need the country’s largest Pride celebration or its most famous gay neighborhood.
It could be a smaller city with a growing LGBTQ+ community, attainable housing, good healthcare, strong cultural amenities and a quality of life that leaves room for travel, retirement or simply enjoying the home you’ve worked hard to own.
Ultimately, today’s LGBTQ+ real estate search increasingly comes down to three questions:
Where can I afford the life I want?
Where will I find my community?
And where will I feel at home?
The answers are becoming more varied—and that’s helping redraw the map of LGBTQ+ America.
Scott Helms is with GayRealEstate.com.
GayRealEstate.com has served the LGBTQ+ community for more than 30 years, connecting LGBTQ+ homebuyers and sellers with LGBTQ+ and allied real estate professionals across the United States. Its network has supported more than $2 billion in real estate sales and more than 55,000 transactions.
-
2026 Midterm Elections5 days agoMeet the LGBTQ candidates running for U.S. House, Senate
-
Serbia5 days agoAna Brnabić becomes world’s first openly lesbian head of state
-
Arts & Entertainment5 days agoVote now! Best Of LGBTQ DC readers’ choice awards
-
Virginia4 days agoGay Va. couple hopeful voters will enshrine marriage equality in state constitution

