For Black women across the Washington metropolitan region, the changing employment landscape is about more than a paycheck. It can mean reassessing a career, redefining success and deciding what comes next.

The numbers underscore the challenge. Revised employment data show that approximately 251,000 Black women lost jobs between January and August 2025, accounting for more than half of the employment losses among women during that period, despite Black women representing just 14.1% of the female workforce. By the end of 2025, there were 113,000 fewer Black women employed than at the beginning of the year.

The impact has been particularly significant in the DMV, where federal employment has long provided economic stability and career opportunities for Black professionals. Maryland alone lost approximately 25,000 federal jobs in 2025, according to state employment data.

For DC Black MBA, those realities call for support that extends beyond helping women find their next job.

“I am focused on doing more and providing as many opportunities as possible for Black women to invest in themselves both professionally and personally,” said Dr. Carletta S. Hurt, president of the DC Black MBA. “We know that when Black women proceed and prosper, everyone benefits.”

That commitment is behind Leading with Intention by Investing in Self, a three-part, in-person workshop series hosted by DC Black MBA in partnership with Blu Topaz Inc. Educational Consulting.

The series builds on the chapter’s August Women’s Symposium, MastHERpiece: Designing a Life with Intention, which challenged women to see themselves as architects of their careers, wealth, wellness and impact. The new workshops take that conversation a step further, asking women to consider where they can work next and who they want to become next.

The series opens Oct. 22 with “Recalibrating Your Compass,” led by Geraldine P. White, Founder and CEO of Identity & Impact. White will guide participants through questions of identity, direction and purpose.

“You can be proud of what you’ve built and ready for something different. Both can be true,” White said. “Investing in yourself includes giving yourself permission to revisit an earlier definition of success and consider what you want your next chapter to make possible.”

On Oct. 29, Tonya Camille, creator of Me in the Making and Unstuck & Inspired, will lead “Successful, But Stuck: How High-Achieving Professionals Reconnect, Realign & Move Forward.”

Her interactive workshop will help women identify fears, limiting beliefs and recurring patterns that may prevent them from moving forward, while developing a concrete next step. “You can’t change what you won’t acknowledge, and you can’t transform what you’re unwilling to confront,” Camille said.

The series concludes Nov. 5 with nonprofit leader, author and consultant Tokiwa T. Smith leading “Rest is Revolutionary.”Her session challenges a familiar expectation placed upon Black women: that achievement and service to others must come at the expense of themselves.

Smith said Black women must recognize that prioritizing themselves, setting boundaries and making room for joy are not signs of diminished ambition. “I believe we thrive when we engage in self-care and community care,” Smith said.

For Hurt, the goal is to create space for Black women to move beyond reacting to an uncertain economy and begin intentionally determining what comes next.

A job loss can require a new résumé. A changing workplace may demand new skills. However, a life transition can also become an invitation to reconsider purpose, boundaries, entrepreneurship, leadership, rest and the meaning of success itself.

For more information, visit the DC Black MBA website (www.dcblackmbaa.org)/.

Based on reporting by Washington Informer.

For years, technology has been one of America’s fastest-growing economic sectors—and one where Black professionals remain significantly underrepresented.

In 2025, Black workers made up 12.7% of the U.S. workforce, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, but only 7.4% of the high-tech workforce, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Their share of high-tech employment had remained essentially stagnant since 2005. Black workers also represented just 5.7% of high-tech managers.

For Black women, the gap is even wider. A 2023 Kapor Foundation report found Black women represented less than 3% of the tech workforce, with even fewer in decision-making and ownership roles.

So, instead of waiting for the broader technology industry to solve its representation problem, could Black Houston build something of its own?

The answer: Yes—but not simply by drawing a line on a map.

Houston has the pieces

Dr. Reagan Flowers, founder of C-STEM and Education Consulting Services, believes Houston already possesses many of the building blocks needed for a Black Tech Corridor.

“What I have not seen is the intentionality to connect, capitalize, and organize assets into an ecosystem where Black Houstonians can create, own, and scale technology companies and participate meaningfully in the wealth those companies generate,” said Flowers.

She contends Houston already offers examples of what a technology ecosystem can look like.

The Texas Medical Center’s innovation infrastructure demonstrates the power of institutional partnerships, specialized facilities, and venture funding. The Ion District demonstrates how universities, corporations, entrepreneurs, real estate, and capital can converge. TXRX Labs shows the value of community-accessible maker and technical-skills infrastructure.

Flowers argues Black Houston can learn from all three without simply copying them. The goal, she said, should be a hybrid public-private-community ownership model.

Third Ward makes sense

If there is a geographic spine for such an ecosystem, Flowers points to Third Ward—particularly Emancipation Avenue. Its location is difficult to ignore.

Third Ward sits near Texas Southern University, the University of Houston, and Houston Community College, and connects to Midtown, the Ion District, and the Texas Medical Center.

UH already has a commercialization platform that takes innovations through invention, prototyping, licensing, venture creation, investor connections, and market expansion. Its Technology Bridge provides a large innovation park with laboratories, offices, and space for technology companies.

“To the west is Rice’s Ion District,” shared Flowers. “To the southwest is the Texas Medical Center and its health-tech commercialization engine.”

In other words, Black Houston would not have to build an ecosystem from scratch.

“The pieces are already on the board,” said Flowers. “They have not been organized around Black technology ownership and wealth creation.”

Is there already one?

Parts of a Black tech ecosystem clearly exist. Houston has Black technology professionals, Black-owned startups, STEM nonprofits, workforce development programs, minority business organizations, Black founders and investors, universities that produce diverse talent, and historically Black fraternities and sororities that support innovation.

But Kara Branch, founder and CEO of Black Girls Do Engineer, cautions against defining success by geography alone.

“I think the conversation needs to be bigger than creating a physical ‘corridor,’” said Branch. “A successful technology ecosystem should be measured by what it produces for the community—not simply where it is located or who occupies the space.”

Loretta Williams Gurnell, founder and CEO of SUPERGirls SHINE Foundation, agrees.

“I believe we have one, yet a successful Black tech corridor cannot simply be viewed as a geographic location. It must function as an ecosystem,” offered Gurnell.

That ecosystem would connect K-12 STEM education, colleges and universities, workforce development, entrepreneurs, startups, corporations, investors, innovation hubs, government, faith communities, and civic organizations.

The objective: Create a seamless pathway from classroom to career to entrepreneurship.

Ownership is the point

Why does Black Houston need a Black-centered technology ecosystem? Because access doesn’t automatically equal ownership.

“As AI, automation, cybersecurity, data analytics, robotics, and emerging technologies continue reshaping the economy, we must ask: Who is building the technology? Who owns the companies? Who owns the intellectual property? Who receives the investment capital? Who benefits economically?” pondered Gurnell.

Those questions matter because technology increasingly drives wealth creation.

Laolu Davies-Yemitan, founding principal of Five Woods Realty, similarly argues that participation alone is insufficient.

“If the Black community is going to capture a meaningful share of the wealth generated by the next generation of technological innovation, the pathway must increasingly include ownership—ownership of companies, intellectual property, real estate, investment capital, and the institutions that support entrepreneurial growth,”

– Laolu Davies-Yemitan, founding principal of Five Woods Realty

“If the Black community is going to capture a meaningful share of the wealth generated by the next generation of technological innovation, the pathway must increasingly include ownership—ownership of companies, intellectual property, real estate, investment capital, and the institutions that support entrepreneurial growth,” shared Davies-Yemitan.

Real barriers

Building the corridor—or innovation district—will not be easy. Capital is perhaps the biggest obstacle. Black founders receive a disproportionately small share of venture funding, making it harder to scale companies, hire workers, and conduct research.

Then there is fragmentation. Houston has organizations doing valuable work in STEM education, entrepreneurship, workforce development, and innovation, but many operate independently rather than as parts of a coordinated ecosystem.

Talent pipelines also require attention. Young people in underserved communities can face limited exposure to STEM, limited access to technology resources, mentorship, and professional networks, and limited knowledge of technology careers. Gurnell’s philosophy is straightforward: Exposure creates aspiration; information drives preparation; preparation creates access.

Digital inequity remains another challenge, including disparities in broadband access, devices, digital literacy, and training in advanced technology. And then there’s social capital.

“Deals are made through trusted relationships,” Gurnell said. “Therefore, those relationships have to be exposed, nurtured, and strengthened.”

Branch adds another warning: Houston cannot confuse activity with impact.

“There can be a lot of panels, events, programs, announcements, and conversations,” she said. “But doing the work means consistently showing up after the spotlight is gone.”

Build talent before buildings

That may be the most important lesson.

“The conversation should not begin with buildings,” said Gurnell. “It should begin with talent.”

That means investing in early STEM exposure, workforce readiness, mentorship, entrepreneurship, capital access, and collaboration among nonprofits, corporations, universities, philanthropies, government, and industry.

Branch points to Black Girls Do Engineer’s STEMXUS EdTech infrastructure as an example of building rather than merely discussing solutions.

“We don’t want a young person to simply hear that engineering, technology, or innovation are possible careers,” Branch said. “We want them to build something, solve a problem, use the technology, meet professionals, develop skills, and understand what their next step can be.”

Branch’s litmus test asks, did someone gain a skill, get a job, launch a business, discover a career, or secure capital or customers? Did a family gain access to opportunity?

From corridor to economy

Flowers suggests thinking beyond a traditional corridor and toward a Black Innovation District; one that connects Third Ward, TSU, UH, and HCC with the Ion, TMC, and Houston’s manufacturing and maker infrastructure.

Rather than competing with Houston’s existing innovation centers, it could become connective tissue between those institutions and Black Houston.

Gurnell envisions additional benefits.

“The greatest opportunity before us is not simply creating a Black tech corridor,” Gurnell said. “It is creating a Black innovation economy.”

The infrastructure for such a corridor/economy exists. The question is whether Black Houston can summon the intentionality, investment, collaboration, and ownership required to make it happen.

Based on reporting by Houston Defender.

By Ken Epstein

Mayor Barbara Lee, speaking this week to Oakland residents and elected leaders in City Council chambers, delivered the annual mayoral State of the City Address, highlighting the city’s accomplishments as well as the challenges Oakland is facing going forward.

Lee began her remarks praising city workers, who picketed outside City Hall before the meeting, and are currently negotiating with the city for a wage increase and ending understaffing that leaves many departments shorthanded.

“We are working very hard (not) just to get a contract, but to get a fair contract,” she said. “I know that our City Council and myself are working constantly toward that end.”

The mayor also praised Councilmember Carroll Fife for her legislation for a 45-day moratorium on data center construction, which passed unanimously at the council meeting Tuesday following Lee’s presentation.

Speaking bluntly, she said, “Oakland continues to be a city on the move, (but) I want to tell you the truth about the state of our city.”

“We have made real progress, and we still face real challenges.”

She said the city has balanced its budget but has a structural deficit, which is decreasing, and must operate within the context of federal funding cuts.

“Too many Oaklanders are unhoused, too many families are struggling with the cost of living, and too many neighborhoods still need basic services that they deserve, and too many people are living in fear,” Mayor Lee said.

“We’re not sweeping these realities under the rug,” she continued. “We are being intentional and transparent about how we must face these challenges, but we will not ignore our progress.”

Substantial progress includes:

• Bringing crime down;

• Building affordable and deeply affordable housing;

• Cleaning the streets and fixing the roads;

• Helping small businesses.

“We are bringing new investment to Oakland,” she said. “We’re making City Hall work better. There’s more to do, but make no mistake, Oakland is on the move.”

Speaking broadly about the city’s public safety initiatives, she said that crime continues to decline. Burglaries fell by 26%, and violent crime fell by 17%.

In recent years, homicides and shootings have fallen by double digits, and gun violence has dropped by more than 50% in the last 33 months.

“These aren’t just statistics: these are lives. These are families. These are people who never made it home,” Mayor Lee said.

She talked about what to expect now that federal court oversight of the Oakland Police Department ended last week after 23 years. “Ending federal oversight does not mean ending accountability; quite the opposite,” she said. “Accountability and civilian oversight must remain our standard. Community trust must be our standard.”

Mayor Lee also emphasized that Oakland remains a city of refuge.

“We do not work with ICE; we do not cooperate with ICE; our police do not cooperate with ICE; we will not be militarized,” she said.

The mayor also emphasized that investing in youth is a top priority of her administration and should be considered a public safety strategy.

“We advocated for almost $2 million to restore the mayor’s youth summer employment program,” she said. “We connected youth with Oakland businesses to develop skills that will support them for years to come, and that’s a big deal.”

To create a police force that better serves and protects Oakland, the city is working toward the goal of reaching 700 sworn police officers, she said. These steps include recruiting from Oakland, holding academies, reinstituting a cadet program, and increasing foot patrols.

The city also is strengthening other programs, including the Department of Violence Prevention and Ceasefire, she said. “We must have this comprehensive public safety strategy, because we must also prevent violence before it happens.”

Continuing, Lee said public safety is connected to unsanitary conditions in city neighborhoods.

“Illegal dumping is unacceptable, and it’s a moral disgrace,” she said. “No child should have to walk past piles of garbage on their way to school; no senior should have to live next to it; no small business should have to clean it up outside its door.”

She said the city is changing the way it fights illegal dumping, securing a $9.2 million investment to develop a new strategy. “We’re not just cleaning it up; we’re working to stop it before it starts. We have the three E’s – Eradication, enforcement, and education,” she said.

Focusing on the continuing crisis of Oakland’s unhoused residents, she said, “We consider housing a basic human right, and homelessness remains one of Okland’s greatest challenges.”

“There are two things we must do: keep people from becoming unsheltered and help people who are unsheltered get back into housing with services that they need,” Lee said.

Since 2024, homelessness in Oakland has fallen by 20%, she said. In the past year prevention programs helped keep 1,000 families in their homes, and over 1,300 affordable homes opened over the past two years.

Addressing community tensions over encampments, she said, “We should never have to choose between compassion for people experiencing homelessness and the health and safety of our neighborhoods.”

“A strong city has to deliver both,” she said. “That’s the work we’re advancing through Oakland’s new homelessness strategic action plan.”

By Ruth Dusseault, Bay City News

The Marin County Board of Supervisors adopted a three-year pilot program that will allow cooks and food entrepreneurs to prepare and sell meals from their homes on Sept. 29

The Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operation program, or MEHKO, will establish a permitting process for small-scale home food businesses. California state law allows licenses if local governments opt in.

“This will deliver immediate financial relief to entrepreneurs in areas like Marin City, West Marin and the Canal neighborhood, removing barriers right where economic opportunity is needed the most,” said Shannon Bell, consumer protection supervisor with Marin County Environmental Health Services, at the meeting.

MEHKO licenses fill the gap between cottage food permits, which only apply to non-potentially hazardous foods like baked goods and jams, and full commercial kitchens.

Microenterprises can serve as commissaries for up to two mobile food operations; they require food to be prepared and served the same day. They are exempt from commercial facility requirements, such as industrial grease traps and commercial stove hoods.

The program allows takeout or on-site dining with strict limits of 30 meals per day, or 90 meals per week, and an annual sales cap of $100,000.

The pilot would begin March 1, 2027, and permits would be capped at 100 per year. Application fees are $725 with an annual renewal fee of $414, but fee waivers for a third of the permits are reserved for low-income communities.

After two years, supervisors will consider making the program permanent.

“By eliminating the need for commercial leases and expensive equipment, entrepreneurs can safely test their businesses and ideas with minimal financial risk,” Bell said. According to statewide data from the Cook Alliance, 85% of MEHKO operators are women, immigrants, and people of color, and over 70% rely on this income to support their families, she said.

Bell also said unpermitted sales are already happening in areas like the Canal.

Local Vendors Seek a Legal Path

Marina Palma advocates for San Rafael’s Canal neighborhood, which is home to a vulnerable community of over 13,000 low-income residents. About 84% are Latino and roughly half of all households spend more than 50% of their income on housing.

Palma told the board that the pandemic caused many Canal residents to lose their jobs, and that’s why the neighborhood has so many vendors selling food in public. Because they have no license, enforcement actions can be harsh.

“They have really high tickets of $600, and their food has been thrown away,” said Palma.

She said MEHKO would help vendors get an official license, but she questions whether vendors will need a Social Security number and be legally in the country.

According to the home-chef’s national nonprofit Cook Alliance, MEHKO applicants need no proof of citizenship nor a Social Security number to obtain a permit.

“I’m from Mexico, and I’m one of the mobile vendors,” said Elsie Vega through a Spanish translator. “I have two jobs. Everything is pricey — house, food, everything. I am here to work hard, to pay taxes. I don’t make enough money to pay the community kitchens.”

MEHKO license holders must pass inspection under the oversight of the Marin County Department of Environmental Health Services and comply with local zoning, parking and noise ordinances.

California authorized MEHKO programs in 2019. Seventeen counties have since adopted them, including Sonoma, San Mateo, Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda and Santa Clara counties.

Other commenters who spoke in favor of the program represented a range of food system and small business organizations. They included the Agricultural Institute of Marin, which operates nine Bay Area farmers markets, the University of California Cooperative Extension, the Cook Alliance, the West Marin Food Systems Group, which coordinates farm-to-school food access, and the Marin Small Business Development Center.

Oakland’s public conversation about health care must begin with a simple truth: a doctor’s appointment is not the same thing as access to care.

For a mother juggling work and child care, access may mean a text-message reminder, a bus pass, an evening appointment, or someone who can explain what Medi-Cal covers. For an older patient managing diabetes, it may mean help scheduling a specialist visit and understanding new medications. For a family that has been dismissed or misunderstood in medical settings, access may begin with meeting a community health worker who knows the neighborhood, speaks their language, and treats their concerns with respect.

Community health clinics make that kind of care possible. They are part medical provider, part navigator, part educator, and part trusted local institution. Proposition 44 threatens to narrow the definition of what counts as patient care in a way that could undermine the very supports that allow patients to receive it.

The statewide measure would require covered nonprofit community clinics to spend at least 90 percent of their annual revenue on health care or qualifying program services. The ballot measure directs the Attorney General to establish more detailed guidance on what expenses qualify. Clinics that do not meet the threshold could face penalties for the difference. The Legislative Analyst’s Office reports that affected clinics currently spend an average of about 80 percent of revenue on health care services.

A percentage may look like a clean measure of accountability. But health care is not cleanly divided between what happens inside an examination room and everything that enables a patient to enter one.

Consider the work that happens before and after a visit. Clinic staff maintain confidential patient records. They follow up after missed appointments. They keep information systems secure. They recruit and train employees in an expensive and competitive health care labor market. They coordinate referrals, process claims, purchase supplies, maintain buildings, and make certain that patients are not lost somewhere between diagnosis and treatment.

Oakland families should not be asked to accept the fiction that these functions are unrelated to care.

The danger in Proposition 44 is not only its 90 percent figure. It is that the meaning of “qualifying” spending will be worked out later. A clinic preparing a budget today may not know whether a navigator, health educator, transportation program, outreach worker, technology upgrade, or other patient-support service will be counted the way it expects. Yet the financial consequence of getting it wrong could be immediate.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office says clinics falling short of the requirement could be required to pay the shortfall amount to the state and could seek to recover the money only if they show compliance within five years. The same analysis estimates state enforcement costs in the low tens of millions of dollars annually, supported by fees.

That is a troubling arrangement for organizations that are expected to provide care to people with the fewest alternatives.

Oakland has learned that trust is not built through slogans. It is built when a patient is listened to, when a parent can secure an appointment for a child, when a clinic returns a call, and when a person receives help without being shamed for their income, insurance, language, immigration history, or prior experience with the system.

For Black residents in particular, trustworthy care is not an abstract goal. Persistent inequities in health outcomes and patient treatment are real. Community-centered clinics can help bridge the gap with culturally responsive staff, patient navigators, behavioral-health programs, and partnerships that understand the conditions shaping health outside the clinic door.

Proposition 44 could pressure providers to treat those supports as expendable because they do not fit neatly into a state-enforced formula. That would be a mistake.

Accountability is necessary. Clinics that receive public resources should be transparent, well governed, and focused on their mission. But good oversight asks whether patients are being served well, whether money is managed responsibly, and whether communities can obtain needed care. It should not rely on a rigid ratio that may punish clinics for doing the hard work of reaching people who need more than a brief medical encounter.

A broad coalition of providers and community organizations opposes Proposition 44, including the California Primary Care Association, the California Medical Association, the California Hospital Association, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, and the California Teachers Association.

Oakland needs health policy that expands the circle of care. Proposition 44 risks drawing that circle smaller.

The Oakland Post editorial board urges a No vote on Proposition 44.

By Paul Cobb, Publisher, Oakland Post

I understand the frustration driving Proposition 40. I share our labor partners’ concerns about protecting health care and essential services at a time when working families are already under enormous pressure.

But labor itself is divided over Proposition 40, and there is good reason to look carefully at what this measure could mean beyond the money it promises to raise.

Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5 percent tax on the wealth of Californians with more than $1 billion in assets. Most of that money would go toward health care, with the remainder supporting food assistance and education-related programs.

Those are worthy investments. The question is whether this is the right way to pay for them.

California’s independent Legislative Analyst says the measure could raise tens of billions of dollars in the short term. But that same analysis warns that California could eventually lose hundreds of millions of dollars a year in ongoing income-tax revenue if some wealthy taxpayers leave the state or change their financial behavior.

That matters because those dollars help support the General Fund and the broader system of programs and services Californians rely on.

So let’s be clear: This is not about feeling sorry for billionaires. Billionaires will be fine.

This is about protecting the people who will not be fine if we get the policy wrong.

For decades, those of us in Black media have watched public policy debates move from crisis to crisis. We have also watched Black communities deal with the consequences when decisions made in Sacramento or Washington did not fully consider what would happen two, three, or four moves later.

We know what happens when funding disappears. Community organizations struggle. Small businesses lose support. Programs serving young people are squeezed. Schools and local governments are asked to do more with less. The people with the fewest resources are usually the first to feel the consequences.

That history should make us cautious about making major changes to California’s tax system without considering the entire board.

If California believes billionaires should contribute more, then let’s have that conversation. There is nothing unreasonable about asking whether people who have benefited enormously from California’s economy should contribute more to sustaining it.

But we should build tax policy that is thoughtful, sustainable, and difficult to avoid. We should not create a temporary solution that could leave us confronting another revenue problem down the road.

This is also why I respect those in labor who support Proposition 40, even though I have reached a different conclusion. They are responding to very real concerns about health care and the people who depend on it. Those concerns should not be dismissed.

But neither should legitimate questions about Proposition 40.

Too often our politics tells us that if we agree with the goal, we must agree with the proposed solution. That is not how responsible public policy works.

You can believe health care must be protected and still question the mechanism being proposed to protect it.

You can believe billionaires should pay more and still ask whether this particular tax is the smartest way to accomplish that.

And you can stand with working people while insisting that California consider the long-term consequences for all of the public programs working people depend upon.

We need to stop treating complicated economic decisions like a game of checkers, where we look only at the move directly in front of us.

We need to play chess.

Look at the whole board. Think several moves ahead. Understand what happens after the first check is collected and spent.

The question before Californians is not whether billionaires can afford to pay more. They can.

The question is whether Proposition 40 is the right way to do it and whether we are confident enough in the consequences to make this kind of change.

Our communities cannot afford for us to discover the answer too late.