Responses of Sabrina Sojourner to
GLAA 1998 Questionnaire for Council Candidates
1. If elected, what will you do to encourage the Council to exercise its powers more responsibly and thereby facilitate a speedy return of home rule powers to the District?
OVERSIGHT. OVERSIGHT. OVERSIGHT! The Council has spent more time overlooking problems than it has providing true oversight.
I will establish the practice of swearing in all witnesses to tell the truth and enforce consequences when they fail to do so; Work full-time for citizens, not for outside interests and old time lobbyists; get out of the office and work directly with our diverse neighborhoods and communities; and scrutinize the Administration nominees.
2. The Council has seldom aggressively exercised its oversight powers over the District government. Instead, too often it has been passive and reactive in addressing the mismanagement problems which routinely plague the District government's administration. What will you do to improve the Council's performance of its oversight responsibilities?
See #1
3. Do you support passage and full funding for the new civilian complaint review system to be established by Bill 12-521, the "Citizen Complaint Review Act of 1998"?
Yes. I have second hand knowledge of how the previous CCRB worked and how it was stifled in effectively carrying out its duties. (My partner, Letitia Gomez and friend, Thomas Gleaton were both active members of CCRB). I would insist that the new body be given enforceable subpoena powers and that their findings be part of the personnel records of officers. The lack of subpoena power by the previous board made thorough investigations by CCRB staff, in some cases, next to impossible. There should be consequences for officers who receive numerous or repeated complaints. The weight of CCRB findings should be equal to that of Internal Affairs.
4. Do you support Bill 12-612, the "Opened Alcoholic Beverage Containers Amendment Act of 1998" (a.k.a. the "Chardonnay Lady Bill"), that would allow people to drink alcoholic beverages on their porches without fear of arrest?
Yes.
5. In an apparent effort to bolster his standing with some segments of the District community, the recently-ousted chief of the Department of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs, David Watts, instituted a zoning regulation earlier this year barring video stores from deriving more than 15% of their revenue from sexually-oriented videos. Do you agree that this attack on the rights of adult consumers is utterly unwarranted and that there should be no limits on the proportion of video store revenues derived from adult videos?
It is not clear to me that there is a means of effectively enforcing such legislation, or that it accomplishes anything of a substantive nature. Regulation for the sake of regulation is a large part of what is wrong with much of DC Code.
6. Will you support legislation to authorize and regulate the issuance of liquor licenses to establishments (in designated non-residential commercial districts) that want to offer nude dancing as entertainment?
Yes. However, I believe that zoning regulations should be used to ensure compatible uses of land and buildings. I disagree with basing regulation on revenue [although this is easier to gauge]. I believe certain types of establishments are incompatible with residential communities. I would like to see zoning regulation that restricts the number of all adult sex industry businesses (nude dancing, adult video or book stores, strip clubs) in our communities. I do not want to see another sleazy 14th Street as we had downtown 5 years ago. They detract from the perception of a "safe environment".
7. Do you support Initiative 59 (or similar legislation) to legalize the use of medical marijuana when a patient's doctor recommends it as a means to combat some of the effects of AIDS, cancer, and other diseases?
Yes.
8. The New York State Legislature recently passed legislation saying that: (1) doctors must report the names of people who test positive for HIV to public health officials; and that (2) health workers must attempt to have infected patients identify their sex of or drug-use partners and then must notify those partners of possible exposure. Such measures are invariable counter-productive and discourage those most at risk from being tested and treated for HIV. Will you oppose any such legislation in the District?
Yes.
9. Do you support an increase in District government funding to combat AIDS in line with the continuing increase in the caseload?
Yes, and the Department of Health needs to provide more effective strategies for reducing the rate of HIV infection in DC.
10. Do you support continued District government funding for the needle exchange program to combat the spread of AIDS?
Yes.
11. Do you support legal recognition of marriages between partners of the same sex?
Yes.
12. Do you support the current District policy, sanctioned by a court rule, of allowing adoptions by unmarried couples?
Yes
13. Do you support both an increased budget for the Office of Human Rights (OHR) so that its heavy case backlog can be eliminated, and the re-establishment of OHR as an independent, Cabinet-level agency whose Director has direct access to the Mayor?
Yes, I do support increased funding so that the Office of Human Rights can effectively carry out its mandate. If it is not possible to increase funding, I would request the Administration detail an appropriate number of legal and support staff to clear the backlog, and work with the Council to identify additional resources for the agency. As far as it being a cabinet level position, I'm not convinced of the need for that. Other cities have been able to make their human rights organizations work without making such a change. I would be more interested in seeing the results of appropriate and stable staffing.
14. Will you support legislation codifying OHR's current practice of granting top priority to discrimination complaints from those afflicted with AIDS or other life-shortening conditions?
I understand the need for such decisions since the Office is severely understaffed. However, I would hope it would develop a two track approach so as to not increase the backlog of cases.
15. Proposals for establishing a system of vouchers for private schools, whether here or elsewhere around the country, would funnel taxpayer dollars to religious schools controlled by denominations that fr3equently are aggressively homophobic. Will you oppose any legislation authorizing vouchers for religious schools?
Yes. I oppose all forms of vouchers.
SABRINA SOJOURNER for At-Large Council
1216 Michigan Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20017
phone: (202) 526-4442
fax: (202) 526-0554
email: sojourner@crystalbuddha.com