Connect with us

District of Columbia

Capital Stonewall Democrats host forum on proposed ranked choice voting, open primaries

Initiative 83 supporters, opponents attended event at Shakers

Published

on

Vote No On Initiative 83 leader Deirdre Brown, front left, joins pro-Initiative 83 leader Phil Pannell, front right, in a friendly toast following their sometimes-heated debate over the proposed D.C. ballot measure hosted by the LGBTQ group Capital Stonewall Democrats and held at the gay bar Shakers. Standing behind Brown and Pannell are Capital Stonewall Dems President Mike Haresign, at left, the groupā€™s vice president, Monica Nemeth, and secretary, Howard Garrett Jr. (Washington Blade photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

The Capital Stonewall Democrats, one of D.C.ā€™s oldest LGBTQ political organizations, hosted a forum on on Monday night, Feb. 19, on the proposed D.C. ballot measure known as Initiative 83, which calls for the city to put in place a ranked choice voting system and for party primaries to be open to all registered voters regardless of their party affiliation, including independent voters.

The forum included presentations by one of the leading supporters and a leading opponent of the controversial initiative. Longtime D.C. LGBTQ rights and Ward 8 community activist Phil Pannell, who serves as treasurer of Make All Votes Count DC, the lead organization advocating for Initiative 83, spoke on behalf of the initiative.

Deirdre Brown, who identified herself as a longtime Ward 3 Democratic Party member and LGBTQ community ally, spoke on behalf of Vote No on Initiative 83, the lead group opposing the initiative. 

Brown pointed out that her organization was separate and distinct from the D.C. Democratic Party, which also opposes Initiative 83 and has filed a lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court to prevent the measure from being placed on the ballot. A judge was expected to hand down a ruling on whether the lawsuit should be dismissed or continue at a Feb. 23 hearing. 

Capital Stonewall Democrats President Michael Haresign, who introduced both speakers, told the Washington Blade after the event, which was held at the D.C. gay bar Shakers, that the LGBTQ Democratic group may not take an official position on Initiative 83. He said that if it does take a position, it would not do so until later this year if the initiative is approved for placement on the ballot in the cityā€™s November election. 

An informal survey of local LGBTQ activists conducted by the Blade shows the LGBTQ community appears divided over Initiative 83, with prominent activists emerging as both supporters and opponents of the measure.

In his presentation in support of Initiative 83, Pannell called ranked choice voting an important electoral reform that has worked successfully in many states and cities across the country. He noted that ranked choice voting serves as an instant, automatic runoff election if no candidate receives at least 50 percent of the vote in a primary or general election. 

As proposed, Initiative 83 would allow voters to rank candidates running for office in order of their preference. Under this system, if no candidate receives at least 50 percent of the vote during the initial ballot counting process, the candidate with the lowest number of votes is eliminated. 

The votes cast by voters who picked that candidate as their top choice would then go to their second-choice candidate. This process would continue, under the ranked choice system, until at least one candidate emerges with at least 50 percent of the votes and is declared the winner.

The second part of Initiative 83 would allow more than 80,000 D.C. residents who currently choose not to register as a member of one of the local political parties and who are not allowed to vote in a primary, to vote in the cityā€™s primary elections, including the Democratic primary. Political observers point out that the Democratic primary usually decides who will win the general election in D.C, where registered voters overwhelmingly elect Democratic candidates to public office. 

ā€œIn terms of ranked choice voting, itā€™s very basic,ā€ Pannell told the gathering. ā€œYou have to start with , do you believe people who are elected should have a simple majority of the vote? If you donā€™t believe that, Iā€™m not going to be able to convince you,ā€ he said. 

Pannell pointed out that in recent D.C. elections, under the cityā€™s public campaign finance law, as many as 20 candidates have run for both at-large and ward seats on the DC Council, with some of them winning with just 30 percent or even a little over 20 percent of the vote. 

Calling himself a lifelong, loyal member of the Democratic Party, Pannell criticized party leaders for opposing what he calls broadening the democratic process by allowing all residents to vote in primaries, especially independents, and for opposing a ranked choice voting system that Pannell said also broadens the electoral consensus by requiring that a candidate receive at least 50 percent of the vote to win an election.

ā€œInitiative 83 will make politics more inclusive, less divisive,ā€ he told the forum. ā€œLetā€™s embrace it. Closed primaries are the result of closed hearts and closed minds,ā€ he said. ā€œLetā€™s open the windows and the doors … Letā€™s change our party for the better and vote for Initiative 83.ā€

Brown, who also described herself as a loyal Democratic Party member from Ward 3 and a native Washingtonian, disputed arguments by Pannell and his colleagues in support of Initiative 83, saying the democratic process is alive and well under the current D.C. electoral system and backers of Initiative 83 are waging a ā€œpropaganda campaignā€ to confuse voters.

Among other things, she said itā€™s not an infringement of democracy by requiring people to register for a party to vote in a party primary. All they need to do is register under D.C.ā€™s rapid registration system, vote in a primary, and then withdraw their registration at any time. She also said independent voters, who Initiative 83 supporters say have a right to vote in primaries, often do not agree with the principles of the Democratic Party.

ā€œAnd normally independents will tell you Iā€™m independent because I don’t believe in Democratic Party values. I donā€™t believe in Republican Party values. I donā€™t believe in statehood values,ā€ she told the gathering. ā€œSo, the question becomes, is it okay for people who donā€™t share your values to pick your leaders? There is no other club or organization that allows people who are not members to pick their leaders. Itā€™s just that simple,ā€ she said.

ā€œThatā€™s not disenfranchising you,ā€ Brown added. ā€œYou just have to choose whether you want to work within a party to promote their values and issues or not. And if you donā€™t, thatā€™s okay, thatā€™s your choice. But you just then donā€™t get to vote until we get to the general election.ā€

Regarding ranked choice voting, Brown cited studies conducted by independent research organizations, including universities, that she said show it ā€œmarginalizes black and brown voters,ā€ voters in low-income neighborhoods, and voters whose native language is not English, many of whom, she said, become confused by the ranked choice voting system. 

She also disputed claims by ranked choice voting supporters that citizens already participate in a ranked choice system in everyday life, including D.C.ā€™s ranked choice public school lottery system, and public housing system and a ranked choice voting system will be similarly easy to understand.

Brown pointed out that unlike the school lottery or public housing system, where making a mistake will not result in serious consequences, ranked choice voting usually doesnā€™t accommodate people who fill out the ballot incorrectly.

“If you make a mistake if you undervote, overvote, your ballot is thrown out,ā€ she said.

Brown concluded by pointing out that financial reports filed by supporters of Initiative 83 filed with the D.C. Office of Campaign Finance shows large sums of money backing the initiative are coming from out of state Political Action Committees or PACS as well as large corporations. 

During a rebuttal period, Pannell pointed to other studies he said show that minority voters, especially African American voters, do not have a problem with ranked choice voting, calling it an insult to say Black people and other minorities who would not adopt to ranked choice voting. 

He said Brownā€™s suggestion that there was something wrong with out of state organizations contributing money to a political cause was unfair and baseless.

ā€œIā€™m the treasurer of this campaign,ā€ he said. ā€œAnd anyone who knows me knows that  I will not play tricks and trash with any political cash,ā€ he told the forum. ā€œAnd this is in the same way that we in the LGBTQ community had to get donations from outside the city when we were fighting for our rights,ā€ Pannell said. ā€œThere is nothing wrong with getting donations from outside of D.C. Candidates do it all the time.ā€

Pannell drew objections from Brown and other Initiative 83 supporters at the Capital Stonewall Democrats forum when he added, ā€œIf weā€™re going to talk about donations, check out the donations going to the Vote No On 83 committee. And you will see that two of the most virulent opponents of marriage equality are contributors to that committee.ā€

Brown replied that she and others involved in the No On 83 campaign are not aware of all the political views of the hundreds of mostly small donors who contribute to their committee. She said an examination of the donors for the Make All Votes Count DC committee might also find some who at one time expressed opposition to LGBTQ rights. 

One person who attended the forum, who spoke on condition of not being identified, said they believed the two individuals Pannell was referring to, who Pannell said were officials with the D.C. Democratic State Committee, supported holding a voter referendum to decide on whether same-sex marriage should be legalized in D.C. The source said the two did not specifically oppose same-sex marriage but wanted the voters to decide the issue rather than the D.C. Council. 

As it turned out, the DC Board of Elections rejected the matter as a voter referendum on grounds that the D.C. Home Rule Charter bans voter initiatives or referendums that could lead to discrimination against minority groups, including LGBTQ people. Opponents of same-sex marriage appealed the election boardā€™s decision to the courts and lost in a final ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld a lower D.C. court ruling agreeing with the election boardā€™s decision. 

After Pannell and Brown concluded their remarks, Haresign opened the forum to questions from those attending the meeting in person as well as those watching on the organization’s Facebook page. The questioners who expressed their own views on Initiative 83 appeared to be divided evenly among the measureā€™s supporters and opponents. 

ā€œI think the forum went well,ā€ Haresign told the Blade. ā€œWe were able to get a high level of information,ā€ he said. 

ā€œIf we were to take a position it would be after everything is certified and we have a full membership vote,ā€ Haresign said, referring to Initiative 83 being certified by the Board of Elections to be on the ballot in November. 

Under D.C. election rules, the boardā€™s certification would come after the lawsuit is dismissed or settled and after Initiative 83 supporters obtain the required number of petition signatures to place the measure on the ballot.  

Pannell urged Capital Stonewall Democrats members and others in the LGBTQ community to sign the petition to get the measure on the ballot, even if they donā€™t support it, saying voters should be given the right to decide the issue.

Brown disagreed, saying ā€œIā€™m asking you if you believe in I-83, then go ahead and sign the petition. But if you do not, Iā€™m asking you not to sign the petition.ā€

The video recording of the Capital Stonewall Democrats forum can be accessed here:

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

Taste of Pride serves community, cuisine ahead of WorldPride

Capital Pride Alliance partners with local restaurants to celebrate LGBTQ culture, support small businesses, and raise funds for the Pride365 Fund.

Published

on

Taste of Pride (Photo by Mark Mahon; courtesy Capital Pride Alliance)

With WorldPride set to kick off next month, bringing an estimated two million visitors to D.C., the cityā€™s LGBTQ and restaurant communities are preparing for an unprecedented celebration.

Capital Pride Alliance, the nonprofit organization behind D.C.’s Pride events, is uniting the city’s LGBTQ and culinary communities to raise money for the Pride365 Fund through a program called Taste of Pride.

Taste of Pride partners with local restaurants across the District to generate funds for the Pride365 Fund, which, in turn, supports local LGBTQ organizations.

The Washington Blade sat down with Brandon Bayton, Special Projects & Influencer Manager for Capital Pride, to discuss how Taste of Pride is giving everyone the chance to support the LGBTQ community while enjoying incredible local cuisine.

ā€œD.C. has become really known as sort of a foodie city,ā€ said Bayton. ā€œThe restaurants that are participating are really stepping up to show their support for the LGBTQ community-especially in these troubling times right now. For them to step up and say, ā€˜Hey, we support you,ā€™ it’s an opportunity for us to share them with our community and say, ā€˜We can support you too.ā€™ā€

For Bayton, who is also the lead planner and producer for Taste of Pride, these restaurants’ open commitment to being safe spaces for the LGBTQ community serves three key purposes. The first is that they create a sense of belonging.

ā€œBy these restaurants participating, there is visibility,ā€ he said. ā€œThey’re saying the LGBTQ community is here. They are patrons. We respect them and we support them. That, first and foremost, is one.ā€ The participating restaurants are also given a sticker to display in their window that proves they are an official restaurant of Taste of Pride.

The second key aspect, Bayton explained, is that these restaurants are financially supporting an organization that directly benefits Washingtonā€™s LGBTQ community. To participate, restaurants must contribute at least $250 to Capital Pride, which serves as a donation to the Pride365 Fund.

ā€œThese restaurants are supporting us financially too,ā€ Bayton said. ā€œThey are pretty much donating. There are tiers, and those tiers are donations to the Pride365 Fund-which is Capital Prideā€™s fundraising arm. That fund supports not just Capital Pride, but our sister organizations too, where we do grants and loans. We can disperse funds to SMYAL or the DC LGBTQ Center. Some of the funds that we’ve been raising go into the completion of the LGBTQ Center. Itā€™s a fund that really supports the community.ā€

Lastly, Taste of Pride provides a platform for restaurants to showcase not only their food but also the queer history of their neighborhoods.

ā€œThe third thing is some of these restaurants are doing actual events, from drag events to poetry readings and hosting artists,ā€ Bayton said. ā€œAnnieā€™s is a participant that’s going to be part of the Dupont Circle/17th Street Taste of Pride weekend in June, and they’re hosting a book launch for an author. His name is Erik Piepenburg, and he has featured Annie’s and other LGBTQ establishments in his book, “Dining Out.” The Watergate [Hotel] has four events that they’re doing. The Union Market community is doing special events for its Taste of Pride. It has been a win-win for everyone.ā€

So far, Taste of Pride has hosted two events: a kickoff event at Hook Hall and a weekend event with the Georgetown Business Improvement District (BID). If those events were any indication, Bayton said, this yearā€™s Taste of Pride is shaping up to be both delicious and fabulous.

ā€œWe had a great panel of chefs,ā€ he said about the January kickoff party. ā€œWe had David Hagedorn, Rob Heim from Shawā€™s Tavern, these guys who call themselves Pirate Ventures. And we had Chef Angela Rose, who not only is a member of the [LGBTQ] community but also leads the Go-Go Museumā€™s cafĆ©.ā€

The event also showcased two local drag artists.

ā€œWe had two performers-Frieda PoussĆ”y and Dior Couture, a definite rising star in D.C. It was a night of food, camaraderie, networking, and friends getting together. It was a nice community event.ā€

Taste of Pride will continue throughout the city, with different Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) hosting culinary-focused weekends from now until July 31. Participating neighborhoods include NoMa, Dupont Circle, Golden Triangle, Capitol Hill, the Capitol Riverfront, and more.

This weekend, Adams Morgan will take center stage, serving up its own Taste of Pride. From the famous pupusas at El Tamarindo to the juicy burgers at Lucky Buns, these iconic and top-rated AdMo restaurants will not only be selling delicious food and raising money for the LGBTQ community, but theyā€™ll also be ā€œsharing a story ā€” one of diversity, inclusion, and Pride.ā€

When asked how people should get involved in the Taste of Pride events, Bayton explained that Capital Pride found an app to ā€œtry to take the heavy lifting off of the restaurants by creating a specialized portal and employing an app.ā€

ā€œOne of the things is to download your Bandwango pass, because that gives you access to all the neighborhood groups as they come online,ā€ he said.

Additionally, Bayton said posting a photo on social media is a great way to bring awareness to local restaurants supporting the LGBTQ community.

ā€œWhen you go into the restaurants, take a picture, tag them, show your support for them,ā€ he said.

This is not the first year Taste of Pride has taken place, Bayton told the Blade. It began in 2021 to support struggling local businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic but has since evolved into what it is today.

Bayton also shared his hopes for the future of Taste of Pride and for it to be recognized as much as a foodie event as a fundraising opportunity.

ā€œMy vision for Taste of Pride is that it becomes a staple of Capital Pride, not just something we do around Pride weekend. It becomes something that is ongoing. I would like to see it grow to become a major event, similar to the Pink Tie Party or Chefs for Equality, but always with the goal of interacting with the community and the allies of our community.ā€

That goal, he said, is impossible to achieve without food.

ā€œI think we connect over food,ā€ Bayton said. ā€œWhen people sit down and they have dinner, it’s that time that provides an opportunity to allow us to connect with one another. Food serves as a key bridge.ā€

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C.-area schools to protest Trumpā€™s ā€˜assault on public educationā€™

Students unite against Trumpā€™s education cuts in unprecedented protest

Published

on

U.S. Department of Education (Photo public domain)

Student government leaders from multiple D.C.-area schools are coming together to protest recent Trump administration actions aimed at restricting student rights in America.

On Friday, April 4, at 4 p.m., the student governments of Georgetown, George Washington, Howard, American, George Mason, and Temple plan to protest the Trump-Vance administrationā€™s efforts to dismantle public education at the Department of Education building (400 Maryland Ave., S.W.), just south of the National Mall. This ā€œunprecedented coalitionā€ of higher education student governments in the D.C.-Maryland-Virginia region, representing 130,000 students, will gather to tell the administration to keep its ā€œHands Off Our Schools.ā€

In a statement emailed to the Washington Blade, Asher Maxwell, press coordinator for the Georgetown University Student Association, called this a ā€œhistoric coalitionā€ and said the protest will highlight how Trumpā€™s policiesā€”dismantling the Department of Education, eradicating DEI initiatives, eliminating funding for academic programs and financial aid, and silencing student voicesā€”are affecting students.

Former middle school principal and U.S. Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York, along with campus free speech advocate Mary Beth Tinker, known for her role in Tinker v. Des Moines, are slated to speak at the rally about the importance of public education and free speech amid what they call the administrationā€™s disregard for the rule of law and constitutionally protected acts such as protesting and speaking out against the government.

The rally is expected to draw thousands of students, from college to kindergarten, as well as First Amendment supporters and those angered by the administration’s efforts to minimize the federal government. Since taking office, Trump has laid off tens of thousands of federal employees, including many within the Department of Education, as he and his senior adviser, Elon Musk, strip away protections and federal spending that disproportionately affect LGBTQ people, people of color, and students.

The Washington Blade reached out to the White House for comment but has not received a response.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. police investigating anti-gay assault in Shaw

Police say suspect punched victim in face after shouting ā€˜homophobic slursā€™

Published

on

The victim said he was punched in the face while walking in front of the 7th Flats apartment building at 1825 7th St., N.W. (Washington Blade photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

D.C. police are investigating a March 7, 2025, assault case listed as a suspected hate crime in which an unidentified male suspect punched a man in the face on the sidewalk outside an apartment building after calling the victim and his male friend ā€œfaggots.ā€

The victim, Destin Karol, and his friend, Ian Dotson, both residents of Arlington, Va., told the Washington Blade the assault took place about 10 p.m. while they were walking along 7th Street, N.W. on their way to the Shaw-Howard University Metro station.

The two men said while walking in front of the upscale 7th Flats apartment building at 1825 7th St., N.W., they saw the male suspect and a woman he was with get out of a car parked in front of the building. Seconds later, they saw the woman vomiting on the sidewalk as they walked past her, the two men told the Blade.

 At that time, the male suspect yelled, ā€œWhat are you looking at, faggots,ā€ Karol and Dotson told the Blade. The suspect then punched Karol in the face ā€œseveral times,ā€ according to a D.C. police report.

Karol said he was diagnosed the next day at a hospital in Arlington near his home with a broken jaw that required the jaw to be wired shut.

Dotson said D.C. police arrived on the scene after he called 911 after witnessing the suspect punching Karol, knocking him down and kicking Karol in the face while he was lying on the sidewalk.

Karol said an ambulance arrived on the scene and paramedics treated his facial injury with an ice pack and offered to take him to the hospital. He said he declined the offer, choosing to go home first. But upon experiencing intense pain the next day, he visited a medical clinic whose doctors told him to immediately go to the nearby hospital emergency room.

An initial version of the D.C. police incident report did not list the incident as a suspected hate crime. But a revised version of the report, which was issued after the Blade contacted police to ask about the earlier report, classifies the incident as a ā€œsuspected hate crime.ā€

The revised report states that the suspect, after telling the victim, ā€œWhat are you looking at,ā€ proceeded to ā€œclose fist strike Victim 1 in the left jaw area several times.ā€ It says Subject 2, who was Dotson, told police the suspect ā€œyelled out homophobic slurs.ā€  

The report concludes by saying, Suspect 1 ā€œwas last seen heading inside 1825 7th Street, N.W.ā€

According to Karol, police so far have not changed the report, at Karolā€™s request, to list the incident as an ‘aggravated assaultā€™ rather than its current listing as a ā€œsimple assault.ā€ Karol points out that under police policy, an assault-related injury that causes a broken bone should be classified as an aggravated assault.

Karol and Dotson said the police report also does not mention that they told the two police officers who arrived on the scene that they saw the suspect and the woman he was with get out of a car and they showed the two officers which car it was as it was parked in front of the apartment building.

Karol told the Blade he and Dotson asked at least one of the officers to take down the license plate number of the car, but the officer said it was not necessary for him to do so. Dotson said he recalls that the car was a white, 4-door Volkswagen hatchback with a Virginia license plate.

Dotson said he and Karol were disappointed that the police did not appear to take down the license number and he regrets that he did not write it down himself. But he said he recalls that the Virginia license tag consisted of all letters and no numbers, with the letters ā€œINā€ as part of it.

He described the suspect as a white male appearing to be between 35 or 45 years old with brown hair and a goatee or beard.

D.C. police spokesperson Paris Lewbel said a Third District police detective has been assigned to the case and the case remains under active investigation. He said he could not comment on the issues raised by Karol and Dotson under a police policy of not disclosing specific details in an ongoing investigation.

Karol said he has been speaking with Detective Wilson, whose first name he does not recall, and said he most recently spoke with her on Tuesday, April 1. ā€œTheyā€™re trying to get the license plate of this individual and theyā€™re trying to get the camera footage from the apartment building and the adjacent buildings,ā€ Karol said the detective told him.

Dotson said at the time the police arrived on the scene on the night of March 7, an employee from the 7th Flat apartment building who identified himself as the concierge came out of the building and told one of the police officers that he saw the male suspect and the woman he was with enter the building.

Police spokesperson Lewbel said he could not disclose whether the concierge was able to help police identify the suspect under the policy of not disclosing details of an ongoing investigation.

Police urge members of the public who may have witnessed an incident like this or who may know something about it, including the identity of a suspect, to call the police information line of 202-727-9099.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular