The issue of the rights of same-sex couples has been gaining momentum in the United States for the past several years. In 1999 Vermont became the first state to recognize same-sex civil unions, which raised numerous questions about recognition of these unions and the couples’ legal rights in the rest of the country.
On February 4, 2004, the supreme Court of Massachusetts ruled on a case that was initiated three years prior, stating that the civil unions for same sex couples did not fulfill the right of required equal protection mandated by the state’s constitution. The court stated that only marriage would meet the constitutional standards.
California became the first state in the union to perform same-sex weddings when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome wed 15 couples on February 17. Bernadillo, New Mexico, followed suit shortly thereafter. Since that time several thousand weddings have been performed in California, and the national debate about same-sex unions has become front-page news. At the end of February, President George W. Bush called for an amendment to the us Constitution banning same-sex marriages.
To date, at least 30 state legislatures have taken some form of action on the question, with many making attempts to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Several of those bills have been shelved or defeated; there is legislation currently pending in as many as 12 states.
On February 27, Jason West, the Mayor of New Paltz, joined the national debate on same-sex marriages by performing weddings for 25 gay and lesbian couples. Though the New York State Department of Health had refused to issue marriage licenses to any of the couples, based on legal advice West proceeded with the ceremonies that solemnized the unions. West has since been charged by Ulster County District Attorney Donald Williams with 19 counts of violating state marriage laws, and an injunction has been issued against his performing more solemnizations.
Well over 200 people attended the ceremonies, which were held in New Paltz’s Peace Park, including family and friends of the couples, supporters and protestors of the event (the former far outnumbering the latter) and the media, which turned out in surprisingly large numbers. The events catapulted the mayor onto the national stage, despite his ongoing statements that he is not the story; equal rights protection under the law is.
Though West has been constrained from marrying more gay couples, two Unitarian Universalist ministers, Rev. Kay Greenleaf and Rev. Dawn Sangrey, have performed 15 additional ceremonies in New Paltz, and have now been charged by the District Attorney as well.
Each day that goes by brings a new development, both locally and nationally, and Mayor West continues to be a high profile player in this controversy. We caught up with him recently (not an easy task, given the recent demands on his time by media ranging from New York magazine to a March 16 appearance on “Late Night with Conan O’Brien”), to try to gain some insight into his part in and reaction to all that has happened.
—Amanda Bader
CHRONOGRAM: Had you ever presided over a wedding before February 27th?
jw: Nope, that was my first wedding.
C: There were hundreds of spectators and members of the media at the ceremonies; there was a huge amount of hoopla. Were you able to step aside from the whole phenomenon and experience how it felt to join two people in marriage?
jw: Actually, it was incredible—and it wasn’t the spectacle that was incredible, it was seeing the couples so excited and fulfilled. Some of them had been waiting twenty years, and the expressions on their faces were amazing. It was really incredible.
C: When did you decide that this issue was an important one?
jw: Performing same-sex marriages has been on my mind since I ran for mayor. Actually, since even before that. I’ve been advocating it publicly for four years now.
The subject first came up when I ran for a seat in the state assembly. The question was asked at one of the county candidate forums and I said then what I’ve been saying ever since: I was in favor of same-sex marriages.
I knew I wanted to perform these marriages, but I hadn’t been asked by anyone. There were quite a few people who knew couples who might want to get married, but just like in any other relationship, it’s a big commitment—it’s not something people do very quickly. But it was one of the dozen or two things I wanted to do as the mayor of New Paltz.
C: So you see gay marriages as one of the social issues on your agenda. What were the steps that you took personally, politically, or professionally to get yourself to a point where you presided over these ceremonies?
jw: I knew it would come up—at some point someone would ask me to perform a wedding. So last summer I asked Spencer McGloghlin, the village attorney, to do all the research into whether I could perform same-sex marriages.
I got a memo from him that basically said the state constitution provided for protection of equal rights, although it was silent on same-sex marriages—so it was, in effect, legal. And then it kind of got put on hold while I was working on other projects and basically waiting for people who wanted to get married to come forward.
C: There are those who believe you have committed civil disobedience, and you have been charged with breaking the law. Do you agree that there is a difference between being a private citizen and an elected official with regard to taking action on a controversial subject? Has that affected your decisions?
jw: Well, I know that there is a difference, but I have not committed civil disobedience in this case.
The position I was put in was that I either had to obey the constitution of the state or I had to obey a small clause in the domestic relations law, because they’re mutually exclusive. You can’t both discriminate who you marry and still abide by the state constitution. And that state constitution is the highest law of the land. I’ve taken an oath of office to uphold the constitution. My oath of office isn’t to uphold the laws of the state; it says that I’m sworn to uphold the constitution of New York.
[In performing these marriages] I’m doing my constitutional duty to uphold my oath of office.
Actually, it’s the [New York State] Department of Health that’s breaking the law. They have the authority to allow these marriages and they’re discriminating by refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. I am not willing to be complicit in their discrimination—I’m not willing to help them to break the law.
C: You have a history as an activist. Part of activism is taking on issues and working to change them in the public sphere. But are you comfortable having done something that has turned out to be this public?
jw: Yes—I have taken a position before. I don’t mind it. I’m very comfortable speaking in public; I have made public stands before, and I just see this as another one.
I just don’t know what accident caused this one to be picked up and broadcast as it has been. I mean, I made the same statements about gay marriage four years ago and the national media didn’t come. There was no coverage. And it wasn’t as if the local press was concerned at that time, either.
C: How did you learn to be an activist—to fight to change things?
jw: A lot of it was here in New Paltz. In 1998 Pataki came to New Paltz for a book signing at Ariel Booksellers promoting his autobiography. I heard that there was going to be a protest, and I went. I met a lot of good organizers there, people like Pete Healey, Gail McGovern, Lee Anne Albritton. They taught me the nuts and bolts of how to organize.
You can learn it like anything else. Activism is not a natural gift; it’s not something you know intuitively how to do. I also spent a month with the afl/cio Union Summer Program, where you learn organizing skills. They taught us how to organize hospitals in the poorest neighborhoods of Philadelphia.
Ed Felton [coordinator of the Mid-Hudson Coalition for Economic Justice], he’s another one who taught me a lot about organizing.
I mean, I learned from local activists who were out and around. I would see them at the Bistro and at Bacchus. They were just there, and they were also working to improve things.
C: When did you start to want to organize?
jw: After that protest in 1998—that was an important moment for me. Up till then I had wanted to change things but I didn’t know how. I had felt powerless and apathetic until I met these people who were working to make a difference, and they gave me a lot of hope. They were regular people who were trying to make things better.
C: Who are your role models?
jw: I think that my role models are people whose names you don’t know.
People like the union organizers in the thirties who went out during the Depression to get better working conditions for everybody. Also the Populist Party workers in the 1890s who traveled all over the South organizing poor farmers for economic democracy.
These are people who faced enormous odds and went out and did their work anyway. It’s not the famous people who are my role models. You can read the history books and hear their stories, but you forget their names. They’re not public figures; they’re not well known.
C: There are liberals and gays who, though they support the idea of same-sex marriage, feel that this is not the right time—that it has provided a diversion from what should be the national agenda, shifting the political debate away from other issues at a time when it’s critical to win back the White House. What do you say to people who think this is a bad time to have started this fight?
jw: I think that is a ridiculous viewpoint. No one is stopping people from talking about other issues.
C: But it happens…
jw: Well, people talk about issues that are important to them. If you have to tell someone whose partner is dying in the hospital and they can’t go and visit them, ‘No, no, no, I’m sorry, we can’t deal with your rights right now, because we have to deal with the deficit,’ you can see that it doesn’t really make sense. These issues are not contradictory, they are very important.
It’s offensive to tell other people to wait for their rights—that you need to have your issues dealt with first.
It’s never the right time for a fight like this. There’s always going to be some emergency that’s ‘more important’; you just can’t wait. And you see that the timing was right for this because you have New Paltz, and then Seattle; Portland, Oregon; Asbury Park, New Jersey; Nyack; all exploring what to do.
C: Take us through the process that led up to your performing same-sex marriages on February 27. What steps did you take to make this happen, and why did you do it now?
jw: During the winter—it was December or January—Billiam van Roestenberg and Jeffrey McGowan, who are friends of mine, were thinking of getting married. We were planning to do something in the springtime when the weather was nice (I think Billiam was thinking about a June wedding). But then the national events started heating up—in Massachusetts, San Francisco, New Mexico—and when Bush made his statement about passing a constitutional amendment, we decided we didn’t want to wait anymore. We thought it was important to show we were another community who wanted to do this.
C: The decision was made when?
jw: The decision wasn’t final until the 25th because I was waiting to confirm legal representation—I wasn’t going to do this at taxpayer expense. So I asked around, looking for an attorney who would represent us on a pro bono basis, and I found Joshua Rosenkranz [of Heller, Ehrman Attorneys in New York City]. I’ve been told he has between half a dozen and a dozen lawyers working on this case for him, all pro bono.
C: It’s an impressive firm.
jw: Yes, it is. Joshua Rosenkranz has argued in front of the Supreme Court, and he founded the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, a public interest law firm.
C: How often do you speak to Mr. Rosenkranz now?
jw: I’m in contact with him every day.
C: Originally this was going to be a quiet thing—what happened that put it onto the national radar screen?
jw: Well, I got confirmation from Joshua’s office at four pm that they were able to represent us, and so we sent out a press release. My office also called some of the local media to let them know what was going on, and then the Associated Press picked it up and sent it out on the wire. Once that happened, it went everywhere and the press was all over it.
The surprise was that the press swarmed all over it. That was so unexpected.
C: But this has been a hot national issue; why didn’t you expect it would be big news here? What did you think would happen?
jw: Well, because it had been out there already I felt like it was old news at this point. Massachusetts had been doing it; San Francisco had been doing it; New Mexico was starting—we were the fourth or fifth community in the country to do this. I figured we’d get some national attention, maybe from the Washington Post or The New York Times—a small article, or a mention somewhere. I thought the local press would cover it, but I didn’t anticipate that weddings in New Paltz would be the big national story that it has become.
C: How do you feel about being the center of a national story?
jw: I still am…it’s…it’s still sinking in. I haven’t had a day off since this started. I haven’t slept for more than four or five hours in a row. I’m still digesting all that has happened.
C: Do you like it?
jw: Uh-unh. [Long pause.] The celebrity thing is ridiculous.
C: Why?
jw: It’s uncomfortable because I’m more of a name brand now than anything else. Hopefully it’s a temporary thing and it’ll fade in a couple of weeks or a couple of months. It’s just an uncomfortable way to be living right now.
C: So you don’t like it when people want to talk to you just because of who you are?
jw: Yes. And the national press is calling all the time. It just doesn’t stop.
C: Your assistant mentioned that the television show “The Bachelor” had called—they wanted you to be the next Bachelor.
jw: [Rolling eyes.] Ridiculous. Yeah, and someone wanted to put me on “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy,” too.
C: Do you think your national celebrity has given you a foothold to do some other things that you wanted to do? Can you use your greater media stature to work on other parts of your agenda?
jw: Yeah. I haven’t tried yet because I’m still reacting—I don’t have time yet. I’m hoping that I will, but right now I don’t have time.
C: Do you see yourself as a national leader on this issue?
jw: No. A celebrity, maybe, but not a national leader.
C: Who do you think the national leaders in the movement to legalize gay marriage are?
jw: I don’t really even think in those terms.
C: So you don’t see this as a movement?
JW: No, I do. But the important people in this have been working on this issue for decades in their hometowns.
That’s why people like me are accidentally shunted into the spotlight. The only reason I’m in the position to talk to the media now is because thousands of people have been working on this for decades. Without any recognition, without any victories. I’m the smallest part of all of this.
The reason there were over a thousand people out at my arraignment wasn’t just my personal ‘charisma’ and to support me; it was because of all the people in New Paltz who, for generations, have not tolerated homophobic jokes. Who have been accepting and loving of their friends and neighbors who are gay. Who have felt comfortable coming out.
This is a community where it is “normal” to be gay or lesbian. It’s not a big deal. Those are the important people in any movement.
I feel like if there hadn’t been a community of ideas, there wouldn’t have been any support for what I have done. There wouldn’t have been any national attention.
C: So you feel that you are representing your constituents?
jw: Yes. Also all the organizers and active people from around the country who have been working to make sure that gay people have equal rights.
C: Is there a network of public officials who are helping each other?
jw: I get lots of phone calls of support, like everybody else does. I’ve gotten fourteen hundred emails. Probably a total of two thousand expressions of support—emails, letters, phone calls, etc. Among those I got calls from the mayor of San Francisco and the mayor of Washington, dc. Among the thousands of supporters are some public officials.
C: Have you been in touch with city officials who are exploring doing this?
jw: I met with Mayor John Shields of Nyack, and I have also spoken with Gifford Miller and Christine Quinn, both phenomenal activists on the New York City Council. Basically, they’re waiting to see how the courts rule to decide how to move forward. As time passes there are more public allies.
C: Are these people who are involved in being activists on a more official level?
jw: People are involved because the issue is important. Some of them hold public office and some of the people are janitors. The difference isn’t between public officials and private citizens.
C: There seems to be a consistent element of religion in the arguments against same-sex marriage. What do you say about this in light of the legally mandated separation between church and state?
jw: They are separate issues. I think that religion should be able to discriminate. That’s a conversation for the clergy and the congregation; they have to make those decisions on their own.
We have separation of church and state. As I represent the state and I’m not a member of the clergy, I’m not allowed to discriminate.
C: Have you spoken with members of the local clergy about what’s going on?
jw: I’ve spoken to Reverend Greenleaf [a Poughkeepsie-based Unitarian Universalist minister who performed several same-sex marriages on March 6 and March 13] and [her colleague] Reverend Sangray. I’ve had several conversations and meetings with clergy—from the Reform Church, Methodist Church, Presbyterian, Episcopalian. Lots of local clergy have expressed their support and want to find ways to be more active, but some are afraid they’re going to lose their jobs if they perform same-sex marriages. Though I am hearing that there’s a movement within a lot of denominations to remove the ban on same-sex marriage. They want to help to find ways to marry people who want to get married.
C: The term “marriage” seems to be a flashpoint in this debate. What if that hot button were removed and was replaced—for everyone—with civil unions, whether it’s a couple of the same gender or of different genders?
jw: My only fear with civil unions is that it’s important that we don’t create something that is not “separate but equal.”
C: What do you want to have happen—what’s the best scenario, and then what would you accept?
jw: The best scenario is that these marriages will happen all over the country. Ideally, within a generation, people will shake their heads and not understand why this was an issue, it would become so normalized.
C: Is that a realistic expectation?
jw: I think so. People don’t talk any more about giving black people separate water fountains. They don’t talk seriously about removing women’s right to vote. Movements change the parameters of what’s acceptable. People don’t talk about bringing back slavery.
C: When you ran for mayor, what did you have in mind to accomplish? What were the top ten things?
jw: Ohh, where to start. Okay:
Get our municipal infrastructure more environmentally sound—like buying our electricity from wind farms and using bio-diesel fuel in our village work vehicles.
Writing some land-use protection laws—environmental protection ordinances, water source protection ordinances.
Build a reed bed system for the sewage treatment plant.
There are a lot of development issues—encourage packaged development for this community.
Address the shortage of affordable housing in New Paltz by trying to flood the market with housing to increase the vacancy rate and try to drive down rents.
Mandate that developers build affordable housing when they’re planning projects.
I wanted to look at our zoning laws to see how we can encourage more of a walking community—like what’s been done on lower Main Street.
C: Did you have specific plans for how to do these things?
jw: Yeah, I’ve been on the Town Environmental Commission for three years. I’ve had some small experience with how the laws were written.
C: So have you been able to go right to work on your agenda?
jw: First we’ve gone about fixing and dealing with the problems created by the previous Boards. We’ve been revising the laws governing access to town sewer and water. The Village has been trying for a year to get the Town to create another water district—and we’ve got that project started now.
And we’re trying to find funding to fix the aging infrastructure. That’s coming from a $2.2 million bond, a half-million dollar grant, and we have to find another $300,000 to pay for sewer lines, water lines, and to build a new water tank.
We’re trying to get projects that are in the works to be more environmentally friendly and affordable.
That, and creating a more open government. We’re working to get a live feed from the Village Hall so Board meetings can be broadcast on public access tv. We’ve created half a dozen new committees trying to get volunteers so people are more involved with government.
We’re also redesigning the Web site to increase access; that has been delayed but is in the works.
C: Do you find that you’re still able to do your day-to-day job as mayor?
jw: As mayor, yes. As house painter, no. I haven’t been able to get to work in two weeks.
C: How are you supporting yourself?
jw: Borrowing money from friends until I can go back to work and catch up.
C: How have these events impacted your relationship with the Board?
jw: It’s not changed, except for with [Village Trustee Robert] Hebel. My relationship with the Board is great. Rebecca [Rotzler], Julia [Walsh], they’re very supportive.
C: Mr. Hebel has said he wants to remove you from office, though recently there was a quote saying he believed that gay marriage should probably be legal. What do you make of that?
jw: You have to talk to him about that.
C: How seriously do you take the risk of being removed from office?
jw: I don’t take it seriously at all.
That clause of the law is designed for people who accept bribes, who embezzle from the village. For people who commit very serious crimes. Somehow I don’t think that marrying people is on a par with those crimes.
Remember, what I got was a Class A misdemeanor; it’s the equivalent of traveling twenty miles per hour over the speed limit. If they’re going to remove me from office for marrying people…then they’re going to have to remove people from office for getting a speeding ticket. I somehow don’t think that’s going to happen.
C: What are your plans for the future?
jw: I plan to run for a second term, as of now.
C: Would you like to perform more marriages, perhaps marry heterosexual couples?
JW: I would. People do ask me to perform their marriages; I just haven’t done any yet—for a variety of reasons. It has been more like, “If we get married, will you perform the ceremony?”
C: When will you go back to house painting?
jw: I have to next week. I have people waiting. I’m stopping all talking to the press so I can get back to making a
This article appears in January 2004.
