Updated on February 6, 2025, at 8:39 AM.
In a troubling new turn, the estate of the late Donald “Donny” Thinnes and developers who own the building and land that once housed Donny’s Place, a beloved and storied LGBTQ+ bar, are now suing the very people who filed to have it recognized as a historic landmark. The lawsuit, filed this week in Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, claims that the nomination process has interfered with their ability to develop or sell the property and that the nominators had “impure motives”—a move that community activists say is a blatant attempt to silence and intimidate those fighting to preserve queer history.
In 2019, Donny reached an agreement with developer Laurel Communities to redevelop the property. Jonathan Kamin, attorney for Laurel Communities and the Thinnes estate, praised Thinnes as an important person to local LGBTQ history but argued that historic designation would be against Thinnes’ wishes. “To have his memory used as a sword against him is really very, very disappointing to all of us,” Kamin said during Wednesday’s meeting of the Historic Review Commission.
The Historic Review Commission is still considering Donny’s Place nomination. The Commission stated that they have received roughly 90 letters in support of historic designation and two letters opposed.
For months, advocates have been pushing for Donny’s Place to receive historic designation, arguing that it was a cornerstone of Pittsburgh’s LGBTQ+ community for decades. The nomination, filed by a group of historians and activists, has been working its way through the city’s Historic Review Commission, which voted 4 – 0 on Wednesday to continue the review process. But now, with legal action hanging over them, nominators face an unexpected and deeply concerning challenge.
Lawsuits like the one filed this week—often referred to as SLAPP suits (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation)—are commonly used by corporations and developers to discourage activism by burdening individuals with costly legal battles. If successful, this case could set a dangerous precedent, making it harder for community-led efforts to preserve queer spaces in the future.
The lawsuit not only threatens the future of Donny’s Place as a landmark, but also raises larger questions about the power developers hold over historic preservation efforts. If nominators can be sued simply for filing an application, will anyone feel safe stepping up to protect other important sites? A ruling in favor of the developers could discourage future preservation efforts—not just for LGBTQ+ spaces, but for any site that a developer would rather demolish than honor.
For now, the historic review process continues with a Commission meeting scheduled for March 5 to include public comment.
