Dana Beyer Cleared of Ethics Charges

In February, 2008, the Citizens for Responsible Government were trying to get people to sign petitions for a referendum to repeal a gender identity nondiscrimination law that had just been enacted in Montgomery County, Maryland. Standing in public places throughout the county, they told unwary citizens that the new law would allow male pedophiles and sexual predators to go into ladies' showers and restrooms legally and molest their wives and daughters. People who heard this were of course shocked, and many of them signed the petitions, though the law had nothing to do with that but merely involved the addition of the term "gender identity" to the usual list of religion, national origin, etc. that was already part of the existing nondiscrimination law.

As you can read from the record of this blog HERE, members of our group and several others traveled around the county, visiting sites where petition signatures were being gathered. We would talk with those who were considering signing the petitions, explaining what it was about and hoping they would decide not to sign. We talked with those who were gathering the signatures, who often did not understand what the real issue was. And when we thought they were standing on land where they might not have given permission,we talked to property owners and store managers, explaining what was happening, and encouraging them to ask the people to leave. It was rewarding work.

Dana Beyer was an assistant to County Council memeber Duchy Trachtenberg at the time. Dana is a transgender woman who has run for office several times, a retired physician and high-profile member of the county's progressive community. She was not part of the group that traveled around the county, but did make an appearance at the Arliss Road Giant store in Takoma Park at the time we went there. Several surly men were haunting the front walkway of the store gathering signatures, and several of us talked with passersby. Dana and I went inside the store and talked with the Giant manager, who decided not to throw the CRG representatives off the property. At some point the police came and kept the two groups separated.

Later, some members of the CRG filed a complaint with the county, stating that Dana Beyer had threatened them, acting as an official of the county. There was a countersuit, hearings, additional complaints.

Now, three years after the event, we have a judgment.

Here is the Montgomery County Ethics Commission's description of the complaint against Dana Beyer.

The Complaint alleged that Dr. Beyer and other Bill proponents interfered with MCRG’s signature-gathering activities at various Giant Food stores by, among other things, yelling and screaming at MCRG volunteers and potential petition signers that they were “bigots;” that by signing the petition they were “for discrimination;” and that the names of those who signed the petition would be “all over the internet.” In one particular incident, at the Arliss/Piney Branch Giant on February 17, 2008, Dr. Beyer allegedly told the Giant manager that she worked for Councilmember Trachtenberg and that the manager would “have problems with the County Council” if he allowed MCRG to stay and gather signatures. The Complaint also alleged that Dr. Beyer intimidated signature gatherers and/or MCRG volunteers by purposefully bumping into them and physically getting between MCRG volunteers and potential petition signers.

The Complaint alleged further that Dr. Beyer used the prestige of her office for personal gain in violation of § 19A-14(a) because, as a transgendered woman, she stood to personally gain from Bill 23-10. MCRG maintained that Dr. Beyer also violated § 19A-14(c) when she used her County position and facilities (e.g., her office computer) in her campaign to thwart MCRG’s petition drive and uphold Bill 23-10. Finally, the Complaint alleged that Dr. Beyer’s conduct at the Giant Food stores violated § 19A-14(e)’s proscription against intimidating, threatening, coercing or discriminating against any person for the purpose of interfering with that person’s freedom to engage in political activity

The Commission investigated the charges and threw out all of them but one. They did decide to hold a hearing into the events that had happened at the Arliss Giant.

There were depositions and testimony. I testified, as did most of the people from our group who had been there. The CRG submitted a written affidavit and a recorded interview by Verlon Mason, a Giant assistant manager who had been there and who referred to Beyer using the derogatory term "shim," and a written statement by CRG signature gatherer Craig Koch. At a hearing the Commission heard testimony from CRG president Ruth Jacobs, who had not been present at the scene. One of the signature gatherers, Steven Schall, testified, refering to Dana Beyer repeatedly as "he" and "him." He said that Beyer had bumped into him and yelled at him.

Montgomery County Police Sergeant Douglas Cobb testified that he'd been there and hadn't seen anything, and Giant assistant manager Aaron Williams said he had seen some loud talking back and forth but no physical contact. He did not recall Dr. Beyer identifying herself as a County employee or saying that she worked for a Councilmember. There was also testimony from a CRG member who had not been at the scene, Alberta Bertuzzi, who had recorded Verlon Mason's testimony and then lost the tape and then found it again.

Testimony was also taken from Dana Beyer, TTF member Andrea Kline, TTF president Christine Grewell, and me.

Here are the conclusions of the Commission:

The ethics law is not an unbounded general code of civil conduct for county employees. Rather, the ethics law is concerned with the way employees conduct County business; the law addresses employees’ private conduct only where the conduct intersects with their public employment. Accordingly, inherent in § 19A-14(e)’s proscription against a public employee’s intimidating, threatening, coercing or discriminating against any person for the purpose of interfering with that person’s freedom to engage in political activity is a nexus with County employment. In order for § 19A-14(e) to be violated, the employee’s conduct must be on the job, include self-identification as a public employee, or otherwise entail the prestige of office.

Assuming that Dr. Beyer did confront MCRG volunteers, Giant Food managers, and patrons, there is no credible evidence that she invoked her County position while doing so. The Commission found Mr. Schall’s testimony, as well as Verlon Mason’s audiotape and affidavit, unpersuasive. Mr. Mason’s use of the derogatory term “shim” when referring to Dr. Beyer, evidences a bias against transgendered individuals. Similarly, Mr. Schall displayed a palpable and unapologetic disdain for transgendered individuals which, in the Commission’s judgment, makes his testimony not credible.

On the other hand, the disinterested witnesses do not support the charge. Montgomery County Police Sergeant Douglas Cobb did not testify to any confrontation, let alone conduct that might violate § 19A-14(e). And while Giant manager Aaron Williams testified that there was a “confrontation,” “shouting,” and “loud talking back and forth,” he would not identify what, if any, role Dr. Beyer played in this confrontation.

It is apparent to the Commission that MCRG and Teach the Facts have very political agendas and this is reflected in their support or opposition to the Bill. There may, in fact, have been harsh words exchanged at the Arliss/Piney Branch on the day in question. But it was not proved that Dr.Beyer violated § 19A-14(e) by intimidating, threatening, coercing or discriminating against any person’s freedom to engage in political activity as a function of being on the job, self-identifying as a public employee, or entailing the prestige of office.

V. CONCLUSION
The complaint is dismissed.

This is not the end of the story. Three years of investigation has cleared Dana Beyer's name and now she can have her day in court.