Councilmember Grosso responds to letter from CFSA's Director following the introduction of ABLE account legislation

On September 11, 2020, Brenda Donald, Director of the Children and Family Services Agency (CFSA) sent a letter of follow-up questions to Councilmember Grosso following his introduction of the ABLE Accounts for Youth in the Care Amendment Act of 2020 and The Overpayment of Benefits Amendment Act of 2020 on July 31, 2020.

Included in the letter are questions regarding youth eligibility and clarification of CFSA’s responsibilities regarding overpayment and ABLE account

Councilmember Grosso has since responded and you can find the questions and responses below and here.

Letter to Councilmember Grosso Regarding the ABLE and the Overpayment of Benefits Bills September 11 2020 - Free download as PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. Letter to Councilmember Grosso Regarding the ABLE and the Overpayment of Benefits Bills from CFSA

COUNCIL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, THE JOHN A. WILSON BUILDING 31350 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004 David Grosso Committee Member Councilmember At-Large Government Operations Chairperson, Committee on Education Health Human Services Labor and Workforce Development September 38, 2020 Brenda Donald Director Child and Family Services Agency 200 | Street, S.E.

Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights Amendment Act of 2020

Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights Act of 2020

Introduced: March 3, 2020

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Robert White, Elissa Silverman, Brianne Nadeau and Mary Cheh

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the Department of Insurance and Securities Regulation Establishment Act of 1996 to prevent abusive acts or practices on the part of student loan servicers, to clarify that student loan servicers under contract with the United States Department of Education shall automatically be issued a limited student loan servicing license upon meeting certain criteria; to clarify denials of applications for approval; to proscribe prohibited conduct on the part of student loan servicers; to assign affirmative duties to student loan servicers; to assign the Attorney General of the District of Columbia the power to enforce the Act; to transfer the Student Loan Ombudsperson from the Department of Insurance, Securities and Banking to the Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia; and require the creation of a Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights by October 1, 2021.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Today, along with Councilmembers Bonds, Cheh, Nadeau, and Silverman, I am introducing the Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights Amendment Act of 2020.

As we all know, having a college education is an important requirement for entry into many jobs and professions with students and their families assuming a financial burden in exchange for a successful future.

To ease the burden, student loans make college accessible to students coming from all income levels, allowing them to pursue their educational endeavors—but at a cost.

On average, repayment rates often negatively affect first-generation college students, along with Black and Latinx students who are more likely to fall behind on loan payments and are less likely to pay off their student loans over time.

Student loan debt is at a crisis level with an estimated 1.5 trillion dollars owed in student loan debt nationally.

In the District of Columbia, the average student loan balance is approximately $56,000 while the national rate for the average student loan balance is approximately $37,000.

The Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights Amendment Act of 2020 will ensure that student loan borrowers in the District of Columbia are protected from abusive acts or practices on the part of lenders.

This bill establishes protections including a Student Loans Bill of Rights and providing borrowers with affirmative protections when submitting written inquiries to their servicers, when splitting single payments across multiple loans, and when their loans are sold or transferred to another servicer.

D.C. Law already prohibits debt collectors, auto lenders, and other loan-based companies from misleading or causing harm to borrowers, and with this bill in place, student loans lenders would be no different.

The proposed bill would also move the Student Loan Ombudsperson from the Department of Insurance, Securities and Banking to the Office of the Attorney General to streamline the complaint referral process when enforcement action is needed while also capitalizing on the existing subject matter expertise of OAG staff.

The Student Loan Ombudsperson assists with the regulation of student loan services, conducts important outreach to assist D.C. residents who are preparing for college and who have already acquired student loan debt.

Finally, this bill provides for a private right of action when borrowers believe they have been victims of abusive acts and violations of the law on the part of student loan servicers.

Pursuing an education using the financial help of a loan provider should not be coupled with the fear that one will not be able to pay or be disadvantaged in the payment process.

I would like to thank the Student Borrower Protection Center for their continued advocacy and partnership with my office on this and many other initiatives to protect D.C.’s student loan borrowers.

Thank you, and I welcome any co-sponsors. 

Consumer Net Neutrality Protection Act of 2020

Consumer Net Neutrality Protection Act of 2020

Introduced: February 4, 2020

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Elissa Silverman, and Mary Cheh

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To prohibit fixed and mobile internet service providers that provide broadband internet access service from engaging in specified actions concerning the treatment of lawful Internet traffic, among other things, such as blocking lawful content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices, impairing or degrading lawful internet traffic on the basis of internet content, application, or service, or use of a nonharmful device, and specified practices relating to zero-rating; and to prohibit fixed and mobile internet service providers from offering or providing services other than broadband internet access services that are delivered over the same last-mile connection as the broadband internet access service, if those services have the purpose or effect of evading the above-described prohibitions or negatively affecting  performance or broadband internet access service.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Today, along with Councilmembers Silverman, Cheh, Bonds, I am introducing the Consumer Net Neutrality Protection Act of 2020 which would codify net neutrality protections for the District of Columbia and its residents.

In 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under Obama appointees, established net neutrality protections for telecommunications services: prohibiting the blocking of lawful internet content, throttling, and paid prioritization of content.

But in 2017, under a Trump-appointed Chairman, the FCC repealed those protections, endangering our residents’ access to an open internet.

With the repeal of these net neutrality protections, Internet service providers are permitted to block or slow down Internet access, demand pay-to play from websites and apps, or otherwise interfere with our residents’ open access to the Internet.

While federal courts ultimately upheld the FCC’s repeal of net neutrality protections, at the same time they left the door open for states and local governments to write their own regulations.

The bill I propose today will benefit all internet users in the District of Columbia by establishing our own net neutrality protections that prohibit discriminatory, anti-consumer, and anti-competitive conduct by broadband providers.

ISPs will be prohibited from discriminating against information and lawful internet traffic by blocking, slowing down, or engaging in paid prioritization.

A free and open Internet is critical to our society. Consumers rely on broadband connectivity to drive growth, personal and community development, but also to facilitate public debate and government accountability.

It is crucial for small business owners, startups and entrepreneurs, who rely on the open internet to launch their enterprises, create markets, advertise their products and services, and reach consumers.

It is also integral to our political system and the right to free speech. Without net neutrality, movements like Black Lives Matter, Me Too, and protests against the president’s Muslim ban may never have happened.

At present, 9 states have enacted their own versions of net neutrality legislation. And, 34 states have introduced legislation attempting to reestablish net neutrality protections.

If passed, we will join states like California, Washington, New York, and many other jurisdictions in declaring our commitment to ensuring an open and free Internet for all, and ensuring our commitment to transparency, and nondiscriminatory practices for our networks.

Every DC resident has the right to equal access of all lawful content using any lawful device in the District. And we as elected leaders must stand up for that right.

Thank you, and I welcome any co-sponsors.

DOPA Disclosure Amendment Act of 2020

DOPA Disclosure Amendment Act of 2020

Introduced: January 21, 2020

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the Rental Housing Conversion and Sale Act of 1980 to require the Mayor to provide an annual report regarding the assignment of the District’s opportunity to purchase affordable housing to third party entities.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today, along with Councilmember Anita Bonds, I am introducing the DOPA Disclosure Amendment Act of 2020.

In 2008 Council established and enacted the District Opportunity to Purchase Act, which gives the right to the District of Columbia to purchase buildings with five or more dwelling units with at least 25% affordable housing.

The goal of the legislation was to employ the resources of government to preserve and expand affordable housing units.

DOPA contained a provision allowing the District of Columbia to assign its rights to purchase to third party entities.

Regulations from the 2008 law were not finalized until November 2018, a decade later.

In May of 2019, the Mayor announced 40 pre-qualified developers who can be assigned the District’s right to purchase.

Unfortunately, nearly 12 years after enactment, the District of Columbia still has not exercised its right to purchase a single property, and the District has missed too many opportunities to purchase.

This bill requires the Mayor to submit a detailed annual report that must disclose:

• Assignees’ demonstrated capacity and expertise in affordable housing;

• The evaluation criteria by which third party assignees consider the purchase of a property that is DOPA eligible;

• The percentage of units that are considered affordable;

• The number of units per property;

• The average rent by unit type per property;

• The subsequent sale price of properties;

• A summary of communications between the assignee and the Mayor per property, among other requirements.

The District of Columbia cannot afford to waste any more time when it comes to preserving and expanding affordable housing.

There is an imbalance in our housing stock combined with rising rents and housing costs, that is displacing mostly low-income families and families of color.

DOPA was intended to be another tool to address our affordable housing crisis, and so far, it’s not even been taken out of the toolbox.

The intent of this legislation is to further understand why this tool is not being used, and once it’s finally taken out of the toolbox, how it is being utilized.

With that, I welcome any co-sponsors, and yield the balance of my time to my primary co-introducer, Councilmember Anita Bonds.

Gendered Terms Modernization Amendment Act of 2020

Gendered Terms Modernization Amendment Act of 2020

Introduced: January 7, 2020

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To articulate the Council’s intention that the D.C. Official Code and its associated organic acts reflect gender equality and gender inclusivity, and amend the D.C. Official Code and its associated organic acts to modernize the language in the laws to reflect the values of gender equity and gender inclusivity.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As we have now entered the third decade of the twenty-first century, we should ensure that the language of our laws, collected in the District of Columbia Official Code, is modernized and reflective of our values.

Language matters, language holds power, and the language of our laws is especially important.

Currently, our older laws show outdated thinking about gender, with a default to masculine pronouns or to masculinized forms of nouns.

Other laws fail to embody the gender diversity of our community, instead using binary language.

Our values in the District of Columbia have evolved and the language of our laws should too.

For that reason, I am introducing the Gendered Terms Modernization Amendment Act of 2020.

The bill is quite simple in concept—that our laws ought to reflect our modern understanding, where male is not the default and people of all genders are supported.

First, the legislation establishes the Council’s intent that the Code reflect our values, including gender equity and inclusivity.

Second, it amends the D.C. Charter and Home Rule Act to remove patriarchal terms, such as by replacing Chairman with Chairperson.

Lastly, the bill sets out a list of gendered terms throughout the D.C. Code that shall be changed and their replacements, with exceptions for laws that require specific gendered language.

Throughout the years, the Council has recognized the need to update our laws to represent shifts in thinking and language.

But those efforts have often been piece-meal, whereas this bill seeks to tackle the entire Code.

Other jurisdictions such as Sacramento and Detroit have undertaken similar efforts, and the District of Columbia should join their ranks.

This bill is timely as our laws are due for a new codification in the coming few years, during which these changes could be made.

D.C. has long been a leader in women’s rights, transgender rights, and recognizing the gender diversity of our community. The language in our laws should further that commitment.

Thank you and I welcome any co-sponsors.

District of Columbia Public Schools Family and School Community Fundraising Equity Act of 2019

District of Columbia Public Schools Family and School Community Fundraising Equity Act of 2019

Introduced: December 3, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmember Vincent Gray

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To establish parameters for fundraising by family or school community organizations, including reporting requirements, limitations on soliciting funds, limitations on allocating funds, and guidelines for redistributing funds

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today, along with Councilmember Vincent Gray, I am introducing the District of Columbia Public Schools Family and School Community Fundraising Equity Act of 2019.

In 2018, The 74 Million reported that DCPS parent-teacher organizations raised more than $5.5 million for only a quarter of DCPS elementary schools. This revenue equates to almost an additional full-time teacher or three additional instructional aides for each DCPS elementary school in DC.

The schools whose PTO’s brought in the least revenue — less than $60,000 on average — had an average of 74 percent economically disadvantaged students. Seventy-five percent of elementary schools did not report any PTO revenue.

The Center for American Progress reported that in 2013-14, the District of Columbia’s five wealthiest PTO’s, all located west of Rock Creek Park, raised over $2.9 million. The top PTO raised almost $1.4 million—about $2,220 per student—while the next four PTO’s each raised more than 300,000 dollars.

And just recently, the DC Fiscal Policy Institute reported that “DCPS students who attend by-right schools in wealthier neighborhoods are more likely to benefit from increased school funding through parent organizations and that these extra dollars are likely giving their children an academic edge, further exacerbating school inequities.”

These funding inequities are not unique to the District of Columbia , as PTO’s across the country are in aggregate raising hundreds of millions of dollars to support programming, services, and staff for their districts’ most resourced schools.

Well-funded DCPS PTO’s are supporting essential school needs like staffing and instructional materials. Specifically, they are hiring grant writers, full-time tutors, and instructional aides. These employees are not DCPS employees, which raises concerns about safety, accountability, and liability.

The bill I am introducing today would address these funding inequities that ultimately exacerbate the disparate academic experiences and outcomes of DPCS students.

It will improve funding transparency by requiring PTO’s to submit annual budgets to DCPS;

It will require an equitable allocation of funds by prohibiting PTO’s from expending funds to hire instructional staff members;

It will require an equitable solicitation of funds by prohibiting PTO’s from requesting a specified donation amount from family members and by prohibiting PTO’s from requiring family members to donate funds in order to vote on PTO-related measures, which amounts to a poll tax for parent participation.

Finally, it will establish a DCPS Equity Fund to aggregate equity fees from PTO’s that expend over $10,000 in monetary and in-kind value. These equity fees will then be distributed in an equitable fashion to DCPS PTO’s.

Because we have not funded our schools at a higher level, something I have pushed for year after year, some wealthier communities are able to supplement their school funding. This is inherently unfair.

We must continue to increase investments in our schools so that outside fundraising by PTOs are not necessary to provide the supports our students need.

I am not claiming that this bill will solve our funding inequities, but it will force us to no longer be blind to the fact that we have not been providing those investments and have been allowing the wealthy to step in and fill those gaps.

Until we provide those investments, we must take a bold stance to address and level inequitable academic experiences and outcomes for DCPS students that PTOs can exacerbate.

This bill also represents a bold stance nationwide as over the last several decades school districts across the country have struggled with addressing PTO funding inequities.

Thank you, Chairman Mendelson and I welcome any co-sponsors.

Local Business Support Amendment Act of 2019

Local Business Support Amendment Act of 2019

Introduced: November 19, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the District of Columbia Code to create a local business ombudsman; establish roles and responsibilities of the Ombudsman’s office and to designate agency-wide Officers for Small and Local Business Inclusion

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you, Chairman Mendelson. Today, along with Councilmember McDuffie, I am introducing the “Local Business Support Amendment Act of 2019.”

During my first term in office, I served as an active member of the Committee on Business, Consumer, and Regulatory Affairs and was an active member of the Workforce Investment Council. During that time, I became deeply familiar with the agencies that govern business operations in District of Columbia.

I consistently heard from local businesses of all sizes that D.C. government regulations are not business-friendly and there are very few incentives for businesses to locate here.

After meeting with businesses and associations of all sizes, we devised a few relatively simple ways the D.C. Council can act to alleviate the government imposed burdens on our city’s businesses.

One way is to create a Local Business Ombudsman who will act as an independent business navigator and will work on behalf of businesses to trouble shoot and act as the point of contact during permitting, licensing and taxation process.

I believe this bill can be the catalyst for a necessary conversation about how we can pass responsible laws and regulations that do not hinder the greatest drivers of our local economy.

I yield the remainder of my time to Councilmember McDuffie for any remarks and we welcome any co-sponsors. Thank you.

Suicide Prevention Continuing Education Amendment Act of 2019

Suicide Prevention Continuing Education Amendment Act of 2019

Introduced: November 19, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Vincent Gray, Anita Bonds, Elissa Silverman, Mary Cheh, Brandon Todd

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE | FACT SHEET

Summary: To amend the District of Columbia Health Occupations Revision Act of 1985 to require continuing education for licensed health professionals on the subject of suicide risk assessment, treatment, and management to provide comprehensive care for at-risk patients.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today, along with Councilmembers Gray, Todd, Bonds, Silverman, and Cheh, I am introducing the Suicide Prevention Continuing Medical Education Amendment Act of 2019 to equip health professionals in the District of Columbia with the training they need to recognize and care for patients who are at risk of dying by suicide.

As chairperson of the Committee on Education, I see the struggles and trauma of young people that can lead them to contemplate or attempt suicide.

It is heartbreaking that between 10-15% of middle and high school students in the District of Columbia have made a suicide attempt and another 20% have made a plan to do so.

We have made great strides in our schools with the passage of my Youth Suicide Prevention and School Climate Survey Act and continuing to increase investments in school based mental health.

But our youth are not the only ones who need help.

Suicide is the THIRD leading cause of death for 15-24 year olds, the FOURTH leading cause of death for 25-34 year olds, and the FIFTH leading cause of death for 35-44 year olds.

And health care providers in the District of Columbia are on the front lines of suicide prevention.

Up to 45 percent of individuals who die by suicide have visited their primary care physician within a month of their death.

The bill I am introducing today would educate these and other health care professionals through continuing medical education on the subject of suicide risk assessment, treatment and management to provide comprehensive care for at-risk patients.

Requiring this training can help us further reduce the number of District residents who die by suicide each year.

I want to thank the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention for their partnership on this legislation and their outreach to build support during their first D.C. State Capitol Day last week.

I also want to thank the Trevor Project for voicing its support for this bill as well and their continued pursuit of policies that aim to reduce suicides, particularly among the LGBTQ community.

I welcome any co-sponsors.

Enhanced Representation Charter Amendment Act of 2019

Enhanced Representation Charter Amendment Act of 2019

Introduced: October 8, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Robert White and Brianne Nadeau

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to reform the structure of the Council from unicameral to bicameral, increase legislative representation of the people of the District of Columbia, provide for non-partisan legislative elections, and to amend the Boundaries Act of 1975 to increase the number of election wards from 8 to 9.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

And finally, today I’m introducing the Enhanced Representation Charter Amendment Act of 2019, along with Councilmembers Nadeau and Robert White, which would reform the District of Columbia government to provide residents more input into the political process at the local level.

I have often said that in a city as large as ours with a population greater than some states, 13 members can be insufficient to tackle the multitude of issues we see regularly in a meaningful way.

The legislation creates a bicameral legislature, with a Senate of nine senators, and an Assembly of twenty-seven Representatives.

With more representatives representing fewer residents, public input can be better captured at each stage of the legislative process and more elected officials and staff time can improve our legislative outcomes.

The bill also makes the elections to Council non-partisan, ensuring that an exclusive party primary does not serve as a de facto general election.

While the residents of the District of Columbia deserve representation in the U.S. Congress, they also deserve a local government that better represents everyone who is affected by our decisions. One that truly reflects their preferences in candidates. And one that provides residents multiple avenues to affect the decisions we make every day on their behalf.

Local Residents Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2019

Local Residents Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2019

Introduced: October 8, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Elissa Silverman, Robert White, Brianne Nadeau, Jack Evans, Brandon Todd, and Charles Allen

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955 to expand the definition of the term qualified elector to include permanent residents for the purpose of local elections.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

The second bill is a re-introduction of the Local Residents Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2019, along with Councilmembers Nadeau, Evans, Robert White, Todd, Allen, and Silverman, which will include more voices in the day-to-day decisions that affect every resident of the District of Columbia.

“All politics is local” is a refrain often heard within the U.S political system. What most D.C. residents care about are the local issues of city life that affect them.

This includes our public schools, taxes, having access to quality health care, crime rates in neighborhoods, and so much more.

All of these issues are important to voters in the District of Columbia but unfortunately, not all of our residents have a say in choosing the officials who make the policy decisions that will directly impact them. In my opinion, that is unjust.

This bill allows permanent residents in the District of Columbia, who are not yet U.S. citizens, the right to vote in our local elections.

These residents may be well on their path to U.S. citizenship. This bill will allow them to legally participate in our elections for Mayor, Council, State Board of Education, ANCs and Attorney General.

While our rallying cry for statehood has included the mantra “No taxation without representation” the same can be said for our legal permanent residents who use our streets, send their children to our schools, and pay taxes just like any other resident—and deserve a voice in our democracy.

Ranked Choice Voting Amendment Act of 2019

Ranked Choice Voting Amendment Act of 2019

Introduced: October 8, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Elissa Silverman, Brianne Nadeau, and Mary Cheh

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To require that candidates to public office be elected using ranked choice voting, to require that District of Columbia voting systems be compatible with a ranked choice ballot system, and to set a date and conditions for implementation of ranked choice voting in the District.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

First, along with Councilmembers Nadeau, Cheh, and Silverman, I am reintroducing the Ranked Choice Voting Amendment Act of 2019, which will further reform how elections are run in the District of Columbia and guarantee that voters truly preferred candidate enters public office.

Too often in the District of Columbia, we see victors emerge from a crowded field with far less than a majority of the vote.

That maybe even more likely to occur now as the Fair Elections program I introduced, and this Council passed has successfully encouraged more residents to seek elected office.

Ranked Choice Voting, or Instant Runoff Voting, ensures that individuals receive a majority of the vote of the electorate, by allowing voters to rank the choices on their ballots in order of preference.

It is extremely troubling that candidates can be elected to public office with as little as 30 percent of the vote or less.

This important legislation will increase voter turnout as voters will be free to mark their ballot for the candidate that they truly prefer without fear that their choice will help elect their least preferred candidate.

Tony Hunter and Bella Evangelista Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019

Tony Hunter and Bella Evangelista Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019

Introduced: September 17, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Elissa Silverman, Robert White, Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, Brandon Todd, and Charles Allen

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend Chapter 1 of Title 23 to curtail the availability and effectiveness of defenses that seek to partially or completely excuse crimes such as murder and assault on the grounds that the victim’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or other inherent identity, is to blame for the defendant’s violent action and to require an anti-bias jury instruction in criminal trials if requested by the prosecutor or the defendant.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you, Chairman Mendelson. Today, along with my colleagues Brianne Nadeau, Robert White, Charles Allen, Brandon Todd, Mary Cheh, and Elissa Silverman, I am introducing the “Tony Hunter and Bella Evangelista Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019.”

This legislation would curtail the use of defenses that seek to excuse crimes such as murder and assault on the grounds that the victim’s identity is to blame for the defendant’s violent action.

At the request of community members, we have named the bill after Tony Hunter and Bella Evangelista, two victims whose cases were marred by the discriminatory statements that are used in the making this so-called panic defense.

In 2008, Tony Hunter died after being attacked in Shaw while on his way to a gay bar.

The man arrested for the assault told police that he punched Hunter in self-defense after Hunter touched him in a sexually suggestive way.

There were many other factors in the case that made it complex, but the fact that the assailant blamed the victim’s sexual orientation for the attacker’s violent actions was disturbing and inappropriate.

This argument is known as the “gay panic” defense and it seeks to blame a victim of a violent attack for provoking the violence by making a sexual comment, action, or simply by expressing their identity.

It is used around the country and throughout D.C.’s history.

The same argument has been used by individuals accused of attacking or murdering transgender women, arguing that the victim’s transgender identity amounted to deception and therefor justified a violent response.

That is essentially the argument that the killer of Bella Evangelista made after he killed her in 2003, also in D.C..

This legislation would end the use of such arguments in the District of Columbia.

The American Bar Association has carefully considered this topic and has voted in support of this type of legislation—in fact the Tony Hunter and Bella Evangelista Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019 is based on the model language put forward by the ABA.

I am a passionate supporter of the human rights of criminal defendants, a fair and swift trial, and for alternatives to incarceration.

All of that is possible without resorting to a defense that is premised on bias against lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender individuals

A defense that exploits bias simply should not be acceptable.

This bill is not limited to LGBT victims, but also covers any situation where an individual might seek to excuse their violent actions on the basis of another person’s identity.

The bill also requires that a jury be instructed to not let bias play a role in their deliberations during a criminal trial if requested by the prosecutor or the defendant.

In this time of heightened rhetoric of hate and violence, it is incredibly important that we act to eliminate bias whenever we can.

Strengthening Reproductive Health Protections Amendment Act of 2019

Strengthening Reproductive Health Protections Amendment Act of 2019

Introduced: September 17, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Elissa Silverman, Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, Brandon Todd, and Charles Allen

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the Human Rights Act of 1977 to recognize the right to choose or refuse contraception or sterilization and to decide whether to carry a pregnancy to term to term, to give birth, or to have an abortio, to prohibit the District government from interfering with reproductive health decisions and from imposing a punishment or penalty on an individual for a self-managed abortion, miscarriage, or adverse pregnancy outcomes, and to prohibit employment discrimination against health care professionals based on the professional’s participation in or the fact that the health care professional is willing to participate in, abortion or sterilization procedures.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you Mr. Chairman, today along with Councilmembers Bonds, Silverman, Nadeau, Cheh, Todd, and Allen, I am introducing the Strengthening Reproductive Health Protections Amendment Act of 2019.

 Across the country, reproductive health decisions—and specifically abortion rights—are under attack.

At the same time the Trump administration is fulfilling its promise to nominate more conservative federal judges, legislatures across the country are enacting unconstitutional laws that restrict access to abortion.

In some cases, laws like Alabama’s, the strictest abortion ban in the country, are crafted in such a way to force the court to revisit Roe v. Wade.

In other states, the laws are meant to make access to abortion so difficult that it will not matter whether Roe stands or not.

D.C. residents have the right, in consultation with their doctor and free from government interference, to make medical decisions about contraception, abortion, or carrying a pregnancy to term.

With this bill, the District has the unique opportunity to enshrine a positive right to choose into the D.C. Human Rights Act, leaving no doubt that the District of Columbia stands for reproductive health freedom. The bill will:

• Recognize the right to choose or refuse abortion care, sterilization procedures, or contraceptives;

• Prohibit penalizing self-managed abortion; and

•  Prohibit discrimination against health care professionals by a health care provider, based on the professional’s participation in abortion care.

Since January, 10 states have passed total or near-total bans on abortion.

It is more important than ever to enact policies that articulate a positive right protecting safe, legal abortion.

While we are well aware that the District of Columbia is subject to the whims of Congress, we are fortunate right now to have a pro-reproductive health majority in the House of Representatives;

Nevertheless, it is imperative that as a city we do our part to protect the rights of our residents.

We need lasting protection for reproductive health access now, no matter what happens in Congress.

This legislation ensures that everyone in D.C. has access to the full range of reproductive health care, including abortion.

Our residents deserve more access to health care, not less. This bill will help to secure a future that safeguards abortion care and respects decision-making.

Students’ Right to Home and Hospital Instruction Act of 2020

Students’ Right to Home and Hospital Instruction Act of 2020

Formerly the Students’ Right to Home or Hospital Instruction Act of 2019

Introduced: July 9, 2019

Approved by the Committee on Education: February 11, 2020

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Robert White, Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, Brandon Todd, Trayon White

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE | DRAFT COMMITTEE REPORT | COMMITTEE PRINT

Summary: To require every LEA to adopt and implement a home or hospital instruction program that provides academic instruction and support to students who have been or will be absent from their school of enrollment for 10 or more consecutive or cumulative school days due to a physical condition or a psychological condition; require OSSE to administer the appeals process; require OSSE to promulgate regulations.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today, along with my colleagues, Councilmembers Brianne Nadeau, Brandon Todd, Mary Cheh, Robert White, and Trayon White, I am introducing the Students’ Right to Home or Hospital Instruction Act of 2019.

This legislation requires every local education agency to adopt and implement a home or hospital instruction program that provides academic instruction and support to students who have been or will be absent from their school of enrollment for 10 or more consecutive or cumulative school days due to a physical or psychological condition. It also creates an appeal process to be administered by the Office of the State Superintendent of Education.

Over the past year, I and my staff have spent time reviewing the policies and practices of DCPS and speaking to the community about DCPS’ Home Hospital Instruction Program.

What I’ve learned is there is no transparency of process for determining a child’s eligibility, no clear mechanism for appealing a decision, and no basic public data about the program.

Further, students who are admitted into the Psychiatric Institute of Washington or St. Elizabeth’s Hospital don’t get any instruction at all. And it's not clear if public charter schools have a program in place, what the requirements are, or if they are in line with best practices.

More troubling is that I’ve consistently heard that many parents don’t know this program exists which puts our students further behind in their schoolwork. This legislation attempts to overcome all of these barriers so that our students can continue to learn no matter their circumstance.

I welcome any co-sponsors. Thank you.

Safe Passage to School Expansion Act of 2019

Safe Passage to School Expansion Act of 2019

Introduced: July 9, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Robert White, Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, Brandon Todd, Trayon White

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE | FACT SHEET

Summary: To establish an Office of Safe Passage to ensure safe passage for students traveling to and from LEAs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday during the school year and summer; and to require the Mayor to provide a shuttle bus from the metro station to a DCPS and public charter school within a priority area with the fewest public transportation options.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you, Chairman Mendelson.

Today, along with my colleagues, Councilmembers Brianne Nadeau, Brandon Todd, Mary Cheh, Robert White, and Trayon White, I am introducing the Safe Passage to School Expansion Act of 2019.

According to research conducted by Guns & America, there were 286 identified shootings in the District of Columbia between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. during the 2016-2017 school year. 177 of these shootings were within a 1,000-foot-radius of a school campus. 82% of these incidents happened near schools on the east end of our city.

And, as many of you know, we've had several scary incidences this past school year.

DC PREP and Ketcham Elementary School have repeatedly gone on lockdown because of the proximity and intensity of the shootings in their neighborhood.

A family was attacked on their way back from KIPP DC Douglass Campus to Anacostia metro station.

Shootings have occurred near Savoy and Tubman Elementary school.

More recently, shots were fired during a movie night at Hendley Elementary School and they’ve been occurring in close proximity to their building over the course of many days.

And we’ve had multiple children die due to gun violence this year on their way to and from school.

This is not normal and it’s not okay. And for far too long, adults have turned a blind eye to this. How do we expect our students to learn when they can’t rely on us to keep them safe to and from school?

This legislation establishes an Office of Safe Passage to ensure students are able to travel safely to and from schools every day during school hours and after school activities. It also requires the Mayor to provide a shuttle bus from the metro station to a DCPS and public charter school with the fewest transportation options.

With continuous and sustained safe passage programming, I believe our students, schools and communities will be safer.

I welcome any co-sponsors.

• Thank You.

Sense of the Council Urging the Federal Government to End its Embargo Against Cuba Resolution of 2019

Sense of the Council Urging the Federal Government to End its Embargo Against Cuba Resolution of 2019

Introduced: June 4, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Robert White, Brianne Nadeau, and Mary Cheh

BILL TEXT

Summary: This resolution reaffirms the District's status as a guardian of human rights for all people and calls on the President and Congress to act quickly to end all aspects of the U.S. economic, commercial, and financial embargo against Cuba, as well as, end all restrictions on travel to Cuba by U.S.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today along with my colleagues, Councilmembers Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, and Robert White, I am introducing the Sense of the Council Urging the Federal Government to End its Embargo Against Cuba Resolution of 2019.

Since 1959, when Fidel Castro seized power in Havana, overthrowing the U.S.-backed government of Fulgencio Batista, the relationship between the United States and Cuba has been plagued by distrust and hostility.

In the decades to follow, economic and diplomatic isolation have come to characterize the U.S. government's policy toward Cuba, with the United States at times engaging in hostile, aggressive and sometimes violent actions against the island nation.

Under the Obama administration, enormous strides were made to reestablish diplomatic relations between the two countries. President Obama eased restrictions on travel and trade, repealed the "wet foot, dry foot" policy, and eventually announced that he and Raul Castro would work to restore full diplomatic ties.

Unfortunately, the Trump administration has altered several Obama-era regulations including eliminating the "people-to-people educational travel" category for U.S. citizens to qualify for a license from the Treasury Department to travel to Cuba.

Additionally, the Trump administration has pulled 2/3rds of its embassy staff from Havana and imposed prohibitions on commerce.

The more the Trump administration seeks to asphyxiate Cuba, the harder the Cuban government will impose political discipline on its people. In the end, the Trump administration's approach will only serve to create scarcity, desperation, and chaos for the Cuban people.

This resolution reaffirms the District's status as a guardian of human rights for all people and calls on the President and Congress to act quickly to end all aspects of the U.S. economic, commercial, and financial embargo against Cuba, as well as, end all restrictions on travel to Cuba by U.S. Citizens.

Community Safety and Health Amendment Act of 2019

Community Safety and Health Amendment Act of 2019

Introduced: June 4, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Robert White, Anita Bonds, Brianne Nadeau

FACT SHEETS | BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE | MYTH vs. FACT

Summary: To amend an Act for the suppression of prostitution in the District of Columbia; to amend an Act in relation to pandering, to define and prohibit the same and to provide for the punishment thereof to remove certain criminal penalties for engaging in sex work in order to promote public health and safety; to repeal Section 1 of an Act to enjoin and abate houses of lewdness, assignation, and prostitution, to declare the same to be nuisances, to enjoin the person or persons who conduct or maintain the same and the owner or agent of any building used for such purpose, and to assess a tax against the person maintaining said nuisance and against the building and owner thereof; to repeal An Act to confer concurrent jurisdiction on the police court of the District of Columbia in certain cases; and to create a task force to assess the impact of this legislation and recommend further reforms to improve community safety and health.

Medical Marijuana Program Patient Employment Protection Amendment Act of 2019

Medical Marijuana Program Patient Employment Protection Amendment Act of 2019

Introduced: May 28, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Robert White, Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, and Vincent Gray

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the District of Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 and the Department of Corrections Employee Mandatory Drug and Alcohol Testing Act of 1996 to prohibit the District of Columbia government from discriminating, in employment, against an individual for participation in the medical marijuana program.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today I am introducing the Medical Marijuana Program Patient Employee Protection Amendment Act of 2019, and I thank Councilmembers Vincent Gray, Robert White, Anita Bonds, Brianne Nadeau and Mary Cheh for joining me as co-introducers.

The voters of the District of Columbia approved establishment of a medical marijuana program in 1999, but due to Congressional interference, the program was not set up and running until a little less than ten years ago.

Since that time, the Council and the executive have worked to improve the program to make medical marijuana available to D.C. residents who need it.

Unfortunately, unlike a number of other jurisdictions, we never updated our laws regarding drug testing to account for the fact that D.C. government employees could be patients registered with the program.

On the positive side, the Department of Human Resources on its own implemented a policy for employees who are registered with the medical marijuana program and who test positive for marijuana in the course of the routine testing that happens for some positions.

I found this out after I began to hear complaints from constituents last year about the fact that some agencies were NOT following the DCHR policy.

While those agencies, including the Department of Corrections, have the right to set their own policies on the topic, the decision to penalize employees for seeking medicine is definitely not the right one to make.

I have tried to work with the Department of Corrections to get this fixed, including sending a letter along with several of my colleagues asking them to follow the DCHR policy.

DOC did not respond for over a month, and then claimed that they were following the policy, which is not true. While they are allowed to do routine testing for safety sensitive positions, they must also allow patients to present their medical marijuana card as explanation for positive results.

Simply put, unless there is a federal law or rule that requires it, D.C. government should not be refusing to hire, firing, or penalizing individuals for using medical marijuana, as long as they are not consuming on the job or showing up intoxicated.

Frankly it is embarrassing that it has taken us this long to take up this measure.

I hope that between this bill and the proposal from Councilmember Trayon White a few weeks ago regarding pre-employment drug testing, the Committee on Labor and Workforce Development can lead a comprehensive discussion in the city about drug testing in both the public and private sectors and come up with a common sense set of reforms to pass.

Residential Real Property Taxes Equitable Alignment Act of 2019

Residential Real Property Taxes Equitable Alignment Act of 2019

Introduced: May 13, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmember Brianne Nadeau

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend section 47-812 of the District of Columbia Official Code to require a marginal tax on high value homes in the District.

Curb Extensions Act of 2019

Curb Extensions Act of 2019

Introduced: May 7, 2019

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Elissa Silverman, Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, Brandon Todd, and Charles Allen

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To require the installation of curb extensions to reduce pedestrian crossing distances when the District performs reconstructions and repavings of roadways.

Councilmember Grosso’s Introduction Statement

Thank you Chairman Mendelson.

All road users, and especially pedestrians, are incredibly vulnerable at intersections.

Unfortunately, we are constantly reminded of this fact, as many of the pedestrians killed recently on our streets were in a crosswalk, like Monica Adams Carlson and Cora Louise Adam just a few blocks away from here on Pennsylvania Avenue.

The standard now is for pedestrians to cross the parking lanes before they have a chance to cross the general travel lanes.

This makes them less visible to cars, extends the crossing time, and makes it too easy for drivers to park in areas that block crosswalks.

Today, along with my colleagues Brianne Nadeau, Elissa Silverman, Charles Allen, Brandon Todd, and Anita Bonds, I am introducing the Curb Extensions Act of 2019 to require the District Department of Transportation to install curb extensions whenever it performs road reconstruction or repavement work.

Curb extensions prioritize pedestrian safety by raising crosswalks to sidewalk level and shortening crossing distances. They also provide an opportunity to beautify our streets and expand our urban tree canopy with additional space for greenery.

Further, curb extensions narrow the turning radius for vehicles, forcing cars to slow down at intersections and effectively making our streets and sidewalks safer for all modes of transportation, not just pedestrians.

We need to change the culture at DDOT in order to achieve our Vision Zero goals of eliminating serious injuries and deaths on our roads. This will never happen as long as we, by default, continually rebuild our dangerous intersections in their same unsafe configurations.

Thank you and I welcome any co-sponsors.