Students in the Care of D.C. Coordinating Committee Act of 2018

Students in the Care of D.C. Coordinating Committee Act of 2018

Introduced: September 18, 2018

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Robert White, Brianne K. Nadeau, Brandon Todd, and Charles Allen.

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To establish a Students in the Care of D.C. Coordinating Committee to identify challenges and resolve issues that students in detainment, commitment, incarceration, and foster care face in order improve educational outcomes.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today, I am introducing the Students in the Care of D.C. Coordinating Committee Act of 2018, along with my colleagues, Councilmembers Charles Allen, Robert White, Brandon Todd, and Brianne K. Nadeau.

This legislation establishes a multi-stakeholder committee to identify challenges and resolve issues that students in detainment, commitment, incarceration, and foster care face in order improve educational outcomes.

On October 4, 2017, the Committee on Education held a public roundtable to examine educational opportunities for students under the supervision or care of the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services, Court Social Services, Pre-Trial Services Agency, Department of Corrections, and Bureau of Prisons.

The roundtable revealed that many students in the care of DC experience significant barriers to earning a high school diploma. Many of these students are placed outside of the District of Columbia and are highly mobile. Consequently, they experience issues enrolling in school, obtaining transferrable credit, and receiving special education and related services. Consequently, these disruptions negatively affect the young person’s ability to move forward and become successful in their educational endeavors.

Fortunately, both public and government witnesses agreed that creating a working group to further tackle some of these issues was the next logical step.

From February to June, I convened a working group of over 80 participants comprised of students, Councilmembers and staff, executive agency

directors and staff, representatives from D.C. Superior Court, school leaders, and advocacy groups. For five months we grappled with how to best improve collaboration and coordination among entities responsible for the education and care of students.

As a result, we produced a report of over 40 policy and legislative recommendations that will help improve educational outcomes. One of those recommendation was to create a coordinating committee. For more information about the report, please visit my website.

I am confident this legislation will provide better educational continuity while strengthening and expanding critical services to ensure that our most vulnerable youth are afforded every available opportunity for success.

Thank you to everyone that participated in the working group and helped make this bill a reality. I look forward to all of the good work that lies ahead.
 

09172018 FINAL Students in the Care of DC Coordinating Committee Act of 2018 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Cashless Retailers Prohibition Act of 2018

Cashless Retailers Prohibition Act of 2018

Introduced: June 26, 2018

Co-introducers: Chairman Phil Mendelson, Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Brianne Nadeau, Vincent Gray, and Trayon White. 

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend Title 28 of the District of Columbia Official Code to require retail food establishments to accept cash; to prevent discrimination against customers who prefer to use cash or do not have access to credit cards or other payment methods; and to provide for enforcement of this requirement.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you Chairman Mendelson. Today, along with you, Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Brianne Nadeau, Vincent Gray, and Trayon White colleague, I am introducing the Cashless Retailers Prohibition Act of 2018.

Several local quick service restaurants, coffee shops, food trucks, and other businesses have recently implemented new policies to ban the use of cash as a form of payment.

This practice requires that patrons have a credit card in order to purchase a salad at Sweetgreen, frozen yogurt at Menchie’s, or a sandwich at Jetties.

Banning the use of cash is a discriminatory practice that disproportionately impacts the 10% of DC residents who are unbanked, and an additional 25% of residents who are underbanked and may not have access to a credit card.

In addition, this practice is discriminatory against youth, who are often unable to obtain a credit card, impacting many of our middle school and high school students.

By denying patrons the ability to use cash as a form of payment, businesses are effectively telling lower-income and young patrons that they are not welcome. 

These are customers who could otherwise afford the simple luxury of a glazed treat from B Doughnut in Union Market, though they may not have the ability to obtain a credit card.

In addition to the disparate impact on low-income and young patrons, this practice effects other customers who may prefer to pay with cash to better manage their budget, or to avoid the very real risk of identity theft that comes along with credit card use.

Through this bill, we can ensure that all DC residents and visitors can continue to patronize the businesses they choose while avoiding the potential embarrassment of being denied service simply because they lack a credit card.
 

Cashless Retailers Prohibition Act of 2018 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

LGBTQ Health Data Collection Amendment Act of 2018

LGBTQ Health Data Collection Amendment Act of 2018

Introduced: June 5, 2018

Co-introducers: Chairman Phil Mendelson, Councilmembers Robert White, Vincent Gray, Anita Bonds, Brianne Nadeau, Charles Allen, Elissa Silverman, Kenyan McDuffie, Mary Cheh, Brandon Todd, Jack Evans, Trayon White. 

BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the Department of Health Functions Clarification Act of 2001 to require the Department of Health to collect information on the sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression of respondents to the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System; and to amend the State Education Office Establishment Act of 2000 to require the Office of the State Superintendent of Education to collect information on the sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression of respondents to the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you Mr. Chairman. Today, Councilmember Robert White and I are introducing the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning Health Data Amendment Act of 2018. We are joined by Councilmembers Vincent Gray, Anita Bonds, Brianne Nadeau, Charles Allen, Elissa Silverman, Kenyan McDuffie, Mary Cheh, and Brandon Todd as co-introducers.

This is a very simple bill—it requires the Department of Health and the Office of the State Superintendent of Education to gather demographic data on sexual orientation and gender identity as part of their public health surveys of adults and students, respectively, in D.C.
Some members will recall this issue came up with regards to DOH a few years ago, and I introduced similar legislation then.

The Department did commit to gather the data, but only every other year, and new developments at the federal level threaten the progress that has been made.

This is data that OSSE is, in contrast, already collecting, and I don’t anticipate it causing any problem for them.

Understanding how our students identify and how that relates to their behavior or risk factors enables us to better serve students’ non-academic health needs.

When those needs are met, we know they are better prepared to succeed academically.

At a time when the federal government is retreating from its responsibility to protect everyone’s human rights, we must ensure that D.C. is doing everything it can to ensure those rights.

Part of that is documenting the health disparities that affect our LGBTQ neighbors so that we can target interventions to end those disparities. 

LGBTQ Health Data Collection Amendment Act FINAL by Team_Grosso on Scribd

State Park Amendment Act of 2018

State Park Amendment Act of 2018

Introduced: January 9, 2018

Co-introducers: Councilmember Vincent Gray

 BILL TEXT 

Summary: To amend the National Children’s Island Act of 1995 to establish Kingman Island State Park for wildlife management and preservation as well as outdoor recreation activities; to establish the Office of State Parks, to manage Kingman Island State Park and future state parks; and to establish the State Parks Commission to facilitate coordination between agencies and other stakeholders for encouraging outdoor recreation and wildlife preservation in the District.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today, along with my colleague Councilmember Gray, I am introducing the State Park Amendment Act of 2018.

This bill celebrates the progress that our city has made in improving access to the Anacostia River, provides new outdoor recreation and outdoor education opportunities, and supports the growth of our outdoor industry.

As we know, the nearly 700,000 residents of the District of Columbia lack the rights that come along with statehood in our country.  This bill renames Kingman Island, formally Children’s Island, as Kingman Island State Park.

As a state park, similar to all other states, this land will be dedicated to preserving and enhancing wildlife and access to nature by supporting the addition of new trails and facilities for mountain biking, camping, hiking, and more.

These improvements will support the implementation of the recently completed Kingman and Heritage Island Planning and Feasibility Study Act of 2016.

This bill will also create a new Office of State Parks within the Department of Parks and Recreation, as well as a State Parks Commission, both of which will help support the continued growth of the outdoor industry in Washington, D.C.

Our city already has a thriving outdoor industry, with multiple National Parks, boat houses along both rivers, regional bike trails, and more.  We even have a flagship location of outdoor retailer REI.  This industry supports thousands of jobs and contributes to a greener and healthier city.

The new office and commission in this bill will help coordinate amongst the multiple jurisdictions and organizations that provide and advocate for outdoor recreation to ensure that all residents, in all eight Wards, have ample opportunities to learn about, and enjoy, the natural world.

I have been proud to work on improving recreation access and restoration of the Anacostia River for over 15 years, from planning Yards Park to helping create the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative.  In taking this next step, I’d like to thank all of the agencies and organizations who we’ve met with over the past year to work on this bill to advance this essential endeavor.

Mayor Bowser has announced that 2018 shall be the “Year of the Anacostia” in Washington, D.C., and I applaud her commitment to this.  There are so many communities that front onto the river, and it will certainly take a major effort, with all of us working together, to make these dreams a reality.

Ensuring that all District residents have easy access to outdoor recreation and education opportunities at our own state park will be an important step towards fulfilling this important initiative.

State Park Amendment Act of 2018 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Student Fair Access to School Act of 2017

Student Fair Access to School Act of 2017

UPDATE: On March 13, 2018, the Committee on Education unanimously approved Councilmember Grosso's Student Fair Access to School Amendment Act of 2018 (originally introduced in November 2017 as the Student Fair Access to School Act of 2017).  The legislation limits out-of-school suspension of students in kindergarten through eighth grade to serious safety incidents and bans its utilization in high school for minor offenses. If exclusion becomes necessary, the bill protects a child's right to an education while they are off premises and requires a plan for the student to successfully return to the classroom.

Read the approved committee print of the legislation and committee report.

Introduced: November 21, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Brianne K. Nadeau, Mary Cheh

FACT SHEET | STATISTICS & RESEARCH | BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To establish parameters for local education agencies’ discipline policies to ensure student safety and access to education, including limits on the use of suspensions and expulsions, reporting, and supports provided by the Office of the State Superintendent of Education to promote trauma-informed educational settings.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

I started working on this bill last spring, looking at the research and what other jurisdictions are doing.

Starting in July I convened several working group meetings with school leaders, advocates, and government officials to discuss the legislation.

Over 25 charter LEAs and DCPS have weighed in, and I have spoken directly with teachers, school leaders, parents, students, advocates, lawyers, researchers, and other experts about the language in the bill.

We may not all agree, but I have solicited and received feedback far and wide on these provisions and made many changes to reflect that engagement.

I have visited a dozen schools recently, and most are already moving in this direction, so it will not be a heavy lift for them to comply with this law.

This bill would limit the use of suspension and expulsion in kindergarten through 8th grade to instances of physical and emotional injury, whether actual, attempted, or threatened.

It would ban suspensions in high school for minor incidents like disobedience or uniform violations.

It would require schools--both DCPS and charters--to have discipline policies that avoid exclusion, address bias, and seek the root causes of misbehavior.

Despite the progress made over the past years, black students in D.C. are 7 times more likely to be suspended than white students—that should outrage us all.

When those students are suspended, they are more likely to fail academically, to drop out, and to end up involved in the criminal justice system.

Research also shows that these practices do not make schools safer, and may actually harm other students.

This bill is about ensuring student success, and disrupting the school-prison pipeline.

FACT SHEET Student Fair Access to School Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Student Fair Access to School Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Abortion Provider Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2017

Abortion Provider Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: November 7, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Brianne K. Nadeau, Jack Evans, Charles Allen, Robert C. White, Jr., Anita Bonds

FACT SHEET | BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the Human Rights Act of 1977 to prohibit discrimination against health care professionals by a health care provider, based on the professional’s participation in, willingness to participate in, or support for abortion or sterilization procedures, or public statements related to abortion or sterilization procedures.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Despite the protection provided by Roe versus Wade, elected officials in state houses across the country and up on Capitol Hill are trying to make it effectively impossible to access abortion services.

This includes a climate of demonization of the medical professionals who provide these services.

A doctor, nurse, or other health practitioner should not have to fear for their job based on their support for the right to choose or their willingness to participate in abortion services.

In fact, discrimination based on an employee’s participation in abortion – or willingness to do so – has been illegal under federal law since 1976.

But there are gaps in the federal law, which has led a number of states to legislate additional protections.

The District of Columbia does not done so, but this legislation would fix that.

It is a rather simple bill, adding protections under our Human Rights Act for health professionals who speak publicly about abortion, or who have a second job providing abortion services.

At a time when speaking out about the importance of access to abortion is critical, we had an incident here in D.C. last year in which a hospital tried to silence a doctor who was an outspoken defender of reproductive rights.

This sort of retaliation, or the firing of healthcare professionals for treating a woman seeking an abortion as has happened elsewhere, is inappropriate and discriminatory.

With over 45,000 people employed in the healthcare industry in the District of Columbia, we need to protect these individuals from employment discrimination like this.

While only a few of those would be likely to need the protection of this bill, we pride ourselves as a jurisdiction that staunchly defends the right to an abortion, and we should ensure that no nurse or doctor fears that they will lose their jobs or careers because of participation in abortion services or advocacy.

Abortion Provider Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Strengthening Community Development Amendment Act of 2017

Strengthening Community Development Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: November 7, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Robert C. White, Jr., Trayon White

FACT SHEET | BILL TEXT | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To amend the Community Development Act of 2000 to require the Chief Financial Officer to regularly evaluate the community development plans of deposit-receiving institutions and to seek public comment prior to the execution of an option year on a contract with a deposit-receiving institution; and to amend section 47-351.05 of the District of Columbia Official Code to increase the weight the Mayor or CFO must give to a financial institution’s community development score in competitions for District banking business.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

In 2014, the Council unanimously passed the Community Development Amendment Act of 2013, a responsible banking law designed to ensure responsible loans, investments, and services are being provided to our low and moderate income and minority communities.

That law required, among other things, an evaluation of financial institution performance in servicing these communities as part of the criteria for deciding which institutions receive municipal deposits and other city business.

The bill was an enormous victory and step in the right direction to hold large financial institutions accountable to historically underserved communities and ensure their continuous investment in these neighborhoods.

Today, that law needs to be strengthened.

In March, Wells Fargo, the city’s bank of record received a national rating of “Needs to Improve” on community lending from its federal regulator.

Despite the misdeeds cited in the evaluation, the city continues its relationship with the much-maligned Wells Fargo.

While there is certainly no perfect financial institution, we should endeavor to prioritize partnerships with business entities, banks, and other financial institutions that are committed to engaging in fair and responsible business practices and those that fulfill their obligations to meet the credit and other needs of the communities they serve.

My legislation seeks to improve upon the existing community development law in three key ways.  First, it requires that financial institutions seeking to do business with the city must, in addition to submitting their community development plans, highlight the programs, products and any partnerships they’ve established to promote affordable housing and equitable development.

Second, the bill increases the weight the CFO must give a financial institution’s community development score in competitions for District banking business.

Finally, the bill requires the CFO to seek public comment, prior to executing an option year on a contract with banks doing business with the city.

Public transparency and accountability should always be paramount when the District seeks to conduct business with financial institutions. We must ensure that these banks will serve the convenience and needs of their local communities and invest responsibly to help maintain the vibrancy of our neighborhoods through sound services and lending.

Reducing Criminalization to Improve Community Health & Safety Amendment Act of 2017

Reducing Criminalization to Improve Community Health & Safety Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: October 5, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmember Robert White

FACT SHEET & SECTION BY SECTION | BILL TEXT | RESOURCES & STATISTICS | COALITION CONTACTS | PRESS RELEASE

Summary: To repeal 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 by removing criminal penalties for engaging in commercial sex.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Good morning. I am At-Large D.C. Councilmember David Grosso, and I am pleased to be here with community members and the Sex Worker Advocates Coalition.

As you may know, all my work on the Council is based in the human rights framework.

That commitment includes speaking out for the human rights of the most marginalized communities, including sex workers.

I believe that we as a society are coming to realize that excessive criminalization is causing more harm than good, from school discipline to drug laws to homelessness.

It is time for D.C. to reconsider the framework in which we handle commercial sex—and move from one of criminalization to a focus on human rights, health, and safety.

That is why today I am announcing the introduction of the Reducing Criminalization to Improve Health and Safety Amendment Act of 2017.

I developed this legislation in close partnership with the Sex Worker Advocates Coalition, and the bill is in line with recommendations from Amnesty International, the World Health Organization, U.N. AIDS, Human Rights Watch, and numerous other expert organizations.

The bill is quite simple really—it repeals a number of laws, or parts of laws, that criminalize adults for exchanging sex for money or other things of value.

By removing criminal penalties for those in the sex trade, we can bring people out of the shadows, help them live safer and healthier lives, and more easily tackle the complaints we hear from communities about trash or noise.

Some of the laws that this bill would repeal are over a hundred years old, showing how the criminalization approach has been a total failure.

There is plenty of other evidence that this approach puts people at risk for violence, inhibits the fight against HIV, and results in the exact opposite of what the laws purported intentions, but I will leave that to my fellow speakers to describe in greater detail.

The bill does not change any of our laws regarding coercion or exploitation, which will continue to be prohibited. Nor does it change how minors involved in sex trade are considered.

Sex workers themselves are often some of the best-positioned people to identify and help people in situations of exploitation, and by removing the criminal sanctions on them, we can improve our efforts on that front.

I want to thank everyone who has helped me work on this legislation and I also want to appreciate all the sex worker activists who have spoken out for their human rights, from Sharmus Outlaw here in D.C., to Gabriela Leite in Brazil, to countless others around the world.

FACT SHEET Reducing Criminalization to Improve Community Health and Safety Amendment Act by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Student Loan Debt Forgiveness Act of 2017

Student Loan Debt Forgiveness Act of 2017 

Introduced: October 3, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Elissa Silverman, Brianne K. Nadeau, and Trayon White

FACT SHEET | BILL TEXT

Summary: To establish a student loan debt forgiveness program for residents of the District.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Currently, the national student debt exceeds $1.3 trillion, surpassing all other types of non-mortgage debt.

As one of the most educated cities in the U.S., the District of Columbia is home to several reputable colleges and universities; so it should come as little surprise that our residents experience significant student indebtedness.

In fact, the District of Columbia maintains the highest concentration of student debtors in the country.  Just last week, the U.S. Department of Education released state-specific information on student debt, for the first time ever.  According to their analysis, D.C. residents owe $5.6 billion dollars in federal student loans with 112,200 student loan borrowers in our city.

Repayment of this type of debt is challenging generally, but it is especially difficult for students who attend community college or for-profit colleges for some time, but never earn a degree or certificate.

Making matters worse, here in D.C. our communities of color are being hardest hit by student debt, as residents East of the River are three times more likely to be at least 9 months behind on their loan payments, than residents in the rest of the city who carry twice as much debt.

The negative impact of educational borrowing on a borrower’s potential wealth accumulation cannot be overstated. Carrying a high amount of student debt can severely limit an individual’s purchasing power and can have a detrimental effect on the greater economy.  Increased student debt impairs home sales, decreases retirement security, stifles entrepreneurship and discourages individuals from seeking careers that require additional education.

Last year, we created a Student Loan Ombudsman position within the Department of Insurance, Securities and Banking and required student loan servicers to become licensed to ensure that servicers are responsive, acting according to clear standards and not creating obstacles to repayment and driving borrowers into default.

While this was certainly a critical step and I am thrilled that Dr. Charles Burt has been hired as the Student Loan Ombudsman, we need to do more to ensure that attending college is not a financial drain on individuals and families, especially families that may have little to no experience with college.

That is why today, along with my colleagues Brianne Nadeau, Trayon White and Elissa Silverman, I am introducing the Student Loan Debt Forgiveness Act of 2017.

This bill establishes a student loan forgiveness program for D.C. residents who are currently enrolled in a federal income-driven repayment plan and meet other eligibility guidelines.

The program will be administered by the Office of the State Superintendent for Education and qualified applicants would be eligible to receive an award equal to 100% of their monthly payment for up to 60 months.

Passage of this legislation, coupled with the work of the Student Loan Ombudsman, ensures that we are protecting our student loan borrowers to the fullest extent and providing them additional opportunities for success.

Student Loan Debt Forgiveness Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Record Sealing Modernization Amendment Act of 2017

Record Sealing Modernization Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: September 19, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Kenyan McDuffie, and Trayon White

FACT SHEET | BILL TEXT

Summary: To amend Chapter 8 of Title 16 to establish a process for expungement of records and qualify certain records for expungement, allow for automatic expungement or sealing of records in certain cases, expand the number offenses eligible for sealing to include all misdemeanors and most felonies and establish procedures for such, and allow for sealing of multiple convictions.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

I am introducing the Record Sealing Modernization Amendment Act of 2017.

This legislation would overhaul the way that we handle records of arrests, charges and convictions in the District of Columbia to support reintegration of people with such records into the community.

At this point there is broad consensus that our criminal justice system has been dysfunctional for too long, resulting in too many arrests and convictions, with racist consequences.

We have begun to move away from using criminal penalties as the solution to social issues, we are seeking to undo the discriminatory policies of the war on drugs, and we are seeking to support people who go to jail or prison to be successful upon their return to the community.

One significant barrier to successful reentry is public access to criminal records.

It is time for us to recognize that making criminal records available does little to improve public safety and directly harms the individuals concerned, in fact hampering their ability to leave behind involvement in criminal activity.

A report from the Center for Court Excellence released last year noted that the burden of criminal records falls almost exclusively on our black neighbors—96% of people sentenced to prison in D.C. are black.

That same report called on the Council to reform the criminal records sealing process.

Research published by the Urban Institute this year showed how a criminal record was a direct barrier to gaining employment, even as having a job is the most important factor in helping returning citizens to avoid recidivism.

Nationally, there is a bipartisan policy trend that acknowledges the unfair premise of visible criminal records and the relationship between criminal records and recidivism.

In the past four years, 21 states have passed laws that expand opportunities for sealing or expunging records.

In preparing this legislation, I heard from constituents who didn’t understand why it can be so easy to seal records for some minor incidents next door in Maryland but so hard here in the District.

This bill would put us at the forefront of restoring people after an arrest or the conclusion of a criminal sentence.

It would create a process of expungement, completely removing some records from the system, such as for arrests that don’t result in a charge.

It would allow an individual to seal more than one record, and would greatly expand the records eligible for sealing.

The bill would make sealing automatic for a number of misdemeanor convictions, which would reduce the burden on the Superior Court as well as on the individual seeking relief.

I was pleased to write and pass legislation a few years ago to allow individuals to seal their arrest or conviction records for marijuana violations, but as I learned how hard it is for people to actually seal their records under our current system, I felt that the promise of that bill was not fulfilled.

It is my hope that the Record Sealing Modernization Amendment Act of 2017 can help fulfill the promise to returning citizens—or even people who are arrested and nothing ever comes of it—that we support them and will not judge them forever for mistakes of their past.

Record Sealing Modernization Amendment Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Medical Marijuana Improvement Amendment Act of 2017

Medical Marijuana Improvement Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: September 19, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Vincent Gray, Robert White, Brianne K. Nadeau

FACT SHEET | BILL TEXT

Summary: To amend the Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998 to increase access to the program by qualified patients by establishing same-day registration and allowing patients to qualify without a doctor’s referral and delivery to patients, establish safe-use treatment facilities to allow consumption outside of the home, allow dispensaries and cultivation centers to relocate and expand operations to meet patient demand, and amend requirements for licensees.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

I am introducing the Medical Marijuana Improvement Amendment Act of 2017, and I thank Councilmembers Gray, Nadeau, and Robert White for joining me as co-introducers.

This legislation, along with the previous bill, will further bolster our responses to the opioid crisis.

Research shows that states with robust medical marijuana programs have lower rates of opioid overdose deaths.

While we have made significant improvements to our medical marijuana program over the past few years, there is more we can do to expand access for patients, and bring more people into the regulated market.

This bill would allow for same day access to medical marijuana just like any other medicine by allowing for a provisional registration when a patient submits their paperwork to the Department of Health.

It would also allow patients who may not have a primary care provider, or whose doctor does not want to recommend medical marijuana, to self-certify that they are seeking medical cannabis.

The bill would allow dispensaries to establish safe use facilities so that patients can consume medical marijuana outside of their home, which would address the challenge that many patients face of having nowhere to consume.

There are a number of other improvements to the program included as well, such as requiring that employees or owners of medical marijuana businesses be D.C. residents, removing the plant count limit, and allowing more residents affected by the war on drugs to be employed in these businesses.

Improving access makes sense when we are in the midst of an opioid overdose crisis, but it also is an appropriate response to the challenges we face as a result of congressional interference with our local efforts to regulate marijuana.

Due to Representative Harris’ rider on our budget, residents are being diverted from the medical marijuana program to the unregulated, easy to access, underground market.

That is posing real problems for the small business owners in the medical marijuana community, and our whole medical marijuana system could be in jeopardy if we don’t take action.
 

Medical Marijuana Improvement Amendment Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Safe Access for Public Health Amendment Act of 2017

Safe Access for Public Health Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: September 19, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmember Vincent Gray

FACT SHEET | BILL TEXT

Summary: To amend Title 25 of the D.C. Official Code to remove possession of certain drug paraphernalia for personal use as a grounds for denial of a license; to amend Title 47 of the D.C. Official Code to remove possession of certain drug paraphernalia for personal use as a grounds for denial of a license; to amend the District of Columbia Uniform Controlled Substances Act of 1981 to remove penalties for possession of certain drug paraphernalia for personal use; to amend the Drug Paraphernalia Act of 1982 to allow possession of certain drug paraphernalia for personal use; and to amend the District of Columbia Appropriations Act of 2001 to remove the prohibition on the operation of needle exchange programs in certain areas of the District.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

I wrote this legislation, along with a bill I will introduce next to improve our medical marijuana program, as a response to the opioid crisis that we face in D.C., much like the rest of the country. 

Last year, we recorded 216 opioid-related deaths, nearly triple the number in 2014.

Meanwhile, we continue to face an HIV epidemic, even as our evidence-based needle exchange programs have dramatically reduced new infections since we were freed from Congress’ prohibition of these life-saving activities. 

This bill takes the next step in those efforts by allowing people to possess drug paraphernalia for personal use.

This is most important for improving access to clean syringes to prevent the spread of HIV and Hepatitis C, but there is also new technology that can save lives in other ways.

Drug testing kits allow people who are using heroin to test the strength of their drugs to avoid overdose, including detecting the presence of fentanyl or carfentanil, the opioids largely responsible for the increase in overdoses.

But these kits would be prohibited as drug paraphernalia under current law.

The Safe Access for Public Health Amendment Act also repeals a congressionally imposed law from years ago that severely restricts the geographical area in which our needle exchange programs can operate.

That law, like so much that Congress forces on us, was not based on any scientific evidence. To the contrary, research shows that the law limits the efficacy of our harm reduction efforts.

We need to consider every evidence-based approach that might help us roll back the tide of overdoses, while also continuing our important progress stopping the spread of HIV and Hepatitis C. 

To that end, today I also sent a letter to Department of Health Director Dr. Nesbitt asking her to examine how D.C. could establish supervised injection sites, where injection drug users could be monitored to prevent overdoses and be connected to treatment.

I hope that Dr. Nesbitt and her team will find a way forward, and that she will also make the overdose prevention medication Narcan more available to our constituents, including by issuing a standing order to allow people to get Narcan over the counter at any pharmacy in the District. 

September is Pain Awareness Month and Overdose Awareness Day just passed on August 31, reminding us of the urgency we must have in our response to these issues. 

Safe Access for Public Health Amendment Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Michael A. Stoops Anti-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2017

Michael A. Stoops Anti-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: July 11, 2017

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

Summary: To amend the Human Rights Act of 1977 to protect individuals experiencing homelessness from discrimination.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today, along with my colleagues Councilmembers Brianne Nadeau, Robert White, and Mary Cheh, I am introducing the Michael A. Stoops Anti-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2017.

Virtually all homeless people experience some form of discrimination.

A 2014 survey conducted by the National Coalition for the Homeless (NCH) and George Washington University found that out of 142 individuals experiencing homelessness, 132 claimed they had been discriminated against because of their homeless status.

Discrimination on the basis of homelessness runs rampant throughout our city- from law enforcement to private businesses, medical and social services.

Therefore this bill amends the Human Rights Act of 1977 to add homelessness as a protected class to help eradicate discrimination for individuals experiencing homelessness in employment, in places of public accommodation, in educational institutions, in public service, and in housing and commercial space.

The bill is aptly named the Michael A. Stoops Anti-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2017 to honor the life and legacy of a person who was a long-time advocate for the rights of individuals experiencing homelessness and a tireless warrior for overcoming income inequality.

During his 67 years of life, Michael was able to accomplish many great things on behalf of individuals experiencing homelessness.

In the 1980s, he help founded the National Coalition for the Homeless.

He also fasted and slept on the street in order to pressure Congress to pass the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, a federal law that provides funding for homeless shelter programs, and is the primary piece of federal legislation related to the education of children and youth experiencing homelessness.

Later, he pushed the standards of living for homeless people by organizing over 100,000 people to join the “End Homelessness Now! Rally”.

In the 1990s, Michael co-found the North American Street Newspaper Association (or “NASNA”). NASNA is a nonprofit trade association of street newspapers that helps to support 110 papers in 40 countries, including our own local newspaper, Street Sense, where Michael served on the board from 2003 to 2014.

Unfortunately, tragedy struck in 2015. Michael suffered a massive stroke, which caused him to be wheelchair bound and unable to speak. However, he still remained dedicated to his life’s mission until he passed away earlier this year.

Passing this legislation will help eliminate discrimination against homeless people simply because they are homeless.

Michael A. Stoops Anti-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Instant Runoff Voting Amendment Act of 2017

Instant Runoff Voting Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: July 11, 2017

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

Summary: To provide for the election of the Mayor, the Attorney General, members of Council, and members of the State Board of Education using instant runoff voting, to require that District voting systems be compatible with an instant runoff ballot system, and setting a date and conditions for implementation.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Reforming the District of Columbia’s campaigns and elections to ensure more residents are engaged in the political process and their voices are accurately reflected in government remains a high priority for me.

Earlier this year, I introduced the Fair Elections Act of 2017, which aims to reduce the influence of big money in local campaigns by establishing a strong public financing system.

This morning, along with Councilmember Nadeau, I continue that push by introducing the Instant Runoff Voting Amendment Act of 2017.

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.

Tabulation of results proceeds in rounds. The first round eliminates the person with the fewest votes, then reallocates those votes to the voter’s second choice in the next round. This continues until one person receives a clear majority of the vote, and we can be sure that this is the preferred candidate of the electorate.

Unlike traditional runoff voting, this method does not require the expense of an additional election since it all happens on one ballot.

Many times in the District of Columbia, we have crowded primaries, open seats and special elections. These are opportunities for individuals to make an attempt at running for public office and giving back to their communities. Therefore the candidate field is often crowded, and victors emerge with less than a majority of the vote.

This will help change how we run for office, and force fields of candidates to focus on vigorous and spirited policy debates that appeal to a wide range of voters.

Instant runoff voting is currently used in San Francisco, Berkeley, Oakland, and San Leandro California; Minneapolis, and St. Paul Minnesota; Portland, Maine; Takoma Park, Maryland; and Santa Fe, New Mexico. Many states also use instant runoff on their military and overseas ballots.

The potential benefits to the District through instant runoff voting are immense.

We can expect higher voter turnout - as voters will be free to mark their ballot for the candidate they truly prefer without fear that their choice will help elect their least preferred candidate.

We can expect positive and more widespread campaigning - since candidates will not only be seeking to be a voters first choice but all will be asking to receive the voter’s second-choice and third-choice.

Instant runoff voting will make our elections more competitive and fair, and strengthen confidence in our electoral outcomes.

Instant Runoff Voting Amendment Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Contract Interference Mitigation Resolution of 2017

Contract Interference Mitigation Resolution of 2017

Introduced: July 11, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Mary Cheh, and Kenyan McDuffie

Summary: To Declare the sense of the Council that the District of Columbia is committed to government transparency and consistency with regard to contracting and procurement; and to call upon the Mayor to more accurately document interactions with lobbyists, especially regarding contracts, to update and standardize the solicitation and bid review process across government agencies, and to take steps to combat the perception of favoritism in the contracting process to mitigate the potential for interference in the contracting process.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Today I am introducing the Contract Interference Mitigation Resolution of 2017 along with Councilmembers Cheh, Bonds, and McDuffie.

The Committee on Transportation conducted an investigation into the resignation of Admiral Weaver from the Department of General Services, the firing of two DGS employees by a member of the Mayor’s executive team, and the handling of two contracts awarded by DGS.

The Committee combed through thousands of pages of documents, including e-mails, correspondence, meeting records, personnel files, and documents related to those contracts, and heard over twenty hours of testimony in December of 2016. 

On June 14, 2017, Councilmember Mary Cheh released findings and recommendations, which included steps that the executive can take, independently of Council action.

While I know there is pending legislation that addresses some of the short-comings raised through Councilmember Cheh’s findings, I thought it would be appropriate for the Council to at least encourage the Executive to take these necessary steps as soon as possible.

That is why we are introducing this resolution to declare the sense of the Council that the District of Columbia is committed to government transparency and consistency with regard to contracting and procurement; and to call upon the Mayor to more accurately document interactions with lobbyists, especially regarding contracts, to update and standardize the solicitation and bid review process across government agencies, and to take steps to combat the perception of favoritism in the contracting process to mitigate the potential for interference in the contracting process.

Sense of the Council Contract Interference Mitigation Introduced Version by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Washington D.C. Preferred Terms Establishment Act of 2017

Washington D.C. Preferred Terms Establishment Act of 2017

Introduced: June 20, 2017

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

Summary: To designate the Governor of Washington, D.C., the Legislative Assembly of Washington, D.C., Representative, and Speaker as preferred terms for references to the District of Columbia and its executive and legislative branches, respectively, and to direct the Mayor to develop a plan for implementing such terms.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Thank you Chairman Mendelson.

Today, along with my colleagues Councilmembers Brianne Nadeau, Elissa Silverman, Anita Bonds and Robert White, I am introducing the “Washington D.C. Preferred Terms Establishment Act of 2017.”

By way of history, the Home Rule movement began in earnest after World War II and Presidents Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy each supported home rule bills with a governor and legislature.

President Johnson ultimately initiated the terms Mayor and Council, possibly to mollify conservative opposition and under the Nixon administration, those terms remained.

As we continue the fight for statehood, it is my hope that this legislation will provide a tangible medium around which we can mobilize community advocates, organizers and residents and reinvigorate the movement as a whole.

The purpose of the legislation is to designate D.C. as Douglass Commonwealth and redefine the Mayor as Governor of Washington, D.C. Additionally, the bill renames this Council as the Legislative Assembly with a Speaker. Further, rather than Councilmembers, we would be referred to as Representatives of the Legislative Assembly.

The legislation further provides that within 30 days of the effective date of the act both the Mayor and the Council must adopt the preferred terms for use in the functions and activities of those respective offices. Finally, within 90 days of the effective date, the Mayor must submit to the Council for review, a plan implementing the preferred terms throughout the District.

Changing these names, of course will not make us a state. However, I believe changing them can move us closer toward statehood.

One of the major barriers to statehood is that many across the country view the District of Columbia as a city. To them, statehood seems like quite a leap but the change put forward in this legislation can help rectify that perception.

Adopting the terms Governor and Legislative Assembly will have the significant effect of giving the statehood movement new momentum. Most importantly, it will help build an expectation in the public mind of statehoods’ logic and inevitability.

Washington D.C. Preferred Terms Establishment Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Community Impact Investment Tax Credit Act of 2017

Community Impact Investment Tax Credit Act of 2017

Introduced: May 16, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmembers Anita Bonds, Elissa Silverman, Robert White, and Charles Allen

Summary: To amend Title 47 of the District of Columbia Official Code to establish a tax credit program for local community development financial institutions to spur the creation of more affordable housing.

Two-Pager

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Across the country, the shortage of affordable housing serves as a significant impediment to the improvement of quality of life and economic competitiveness.  According to a report published by the National Low-Income Housing Coalition last year, there is not a single state in the U.S. where a minimum wage employee working full-time can reasonably afford a one-bedroom apartment at fair market rent.

Here in the District of Columbia, rents have risen by almost 30 percent over the past 10 years.  While the city has made historic investments into the Housing Production Trust Fund, meeting the actual affordable housing demand would require an investment of around $5 billion according to the D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute; a figure that is untenable to achieve while still investing in other needs and priorities.

That is why today along with my colleagues, Councilmembers Robert White, Elissa Silverman, and Charles Allen, I am introducing the Community Impact Investment Tax Credit Act of 2017.

This legislation establishes a tax credit program for taxpayers making an impact investment through a community development financial institution or CDFI, to spur the creation and preservation of more affordable housing.  

Under the bill, individuals, corporations and foundations—stakeholders that may not otherwise directly invest in affordable housing efforts, will be eligible to claim as a credit against their District income taxes, unincorporated business franchise taxes or corporation franchise taxes, 33 percent of their investment up to $1 million.

Impact investments serve to encourage responsible investing by mobilizing capital into mission-oriented entities that strive to make a positive impact in areas presenting social, environmental or infrastructural challenges while yielding a financial return. 

Through this legislation we will accomplish the public policy goal of expanding affordable housing across the city by leveraging the private market to seed investments in affordable housing production and preservation.  

Since just last year, Enterprise Community Partners, a local CDFI has been able to raise $11 million in impact capital to finance the preservation and production of local affordable homes.

Their ability to raise this amount of capital in less than a year demonstrates investor demand to support affordable housing.  Unfortunately, we currently lack tax benefits and incentives for this sort of investment, which serves as a barrier to attracting many people that may be interested in making an investment of this kind.

Solving the affordable housing crisis is not something that will occur overnight and is not something that can be accomplished by any one entity or organization; however, through this legislation we will add another financing tool to the arsenal and partner with the private market to expand the amount of debt capital available for affordable housing projects.
 

Community Impact Investment Tax Credt Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Fair Elections Act of 2017

Fair Elections Act of 2017

Introduced: March 22, 2017

Co-introducers: Chairman Phil Mendelson, Councilmembers Elissa Silverman, Robert White, Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, Kenyan McDuffie, Charles Allen, and Trayon White

Summary: To reform campaign financing and to provide for publicly funded political campaigns.

Councilmember Grosso's Introduction Statement:

Today, along with my colleagues Councilmembers Charles Allen, Elissa Silverman, Robert White, Mary Cheh, Kenyan McDuffie, Trayon White and Brianne Nadeau, I am reintroducing the “Fair Elections Act of 2017.”

Since I’ve been in office, I have introduced some version of this bill in every Council period because I believe strongly that public financing of elections is one of the most vital tools to combat the corrupting influence of outsized campaign spending.

As we all know, campaign donations are a necessary, though sometimes complicated aspect of politics.

Support for candidates in the District of Columbia today generally comes from three sources: Friends of a candidate who know his or her qualifications and support their aspirations for democracy and the common good; Citizens who have views on governance and public policy, or citizens with grievances with governance; and individuals with commercial interests that either benefit or risk loss due to decisions of governance.

All of these sources are appropriate in a functioning democracy; however, the situation we face today is that we are out of balance—big donors outweigh the ability of others’ to influence campaigns.

My legislation helps to restore that balance by establishing a robust public financing program.

In Council Period 21, then-Chair of the Committee on Judiciary, Councilmember McDuffie held a hearing on this bill, which brought about important feedback and healthy criticism.

Following that hearing, my staff worked to make the changes recommended by the Attorney General and completed an in-depth analysis of the previous3 election cycles to understand what is truly needed to run a successful campaign in the District of Columbia.

Under the legislation, qualified participating candidates are eligible to receive base amount allocations and matching payments, the latter both before qualifying for the ballot and after.

In addition to fighting corruption, a public financing system empowers residents of ordinary means to have a meaningful ability to compete for elected office.  Establishing this system will allow those who may not have personal wealth or access to high-powered connections to launch competitive campaigns.

This is bill is about amplifying the voices of everyday D.C. residents and I hope that all of my colleagues will stand up for publicly funded elections and cosponsor this legislation.

I yield the remainder of my time to my co-introducers and I welcome any co-sponsors.

Fair Elections Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd

Strengthening Government Transparency Amendment Act of 2017

Strengthening Government Transparency Amendment Act of 2017

Introduced: March 15, 2017

Co-introducers: Councilmember Mary Cheh

Summary: To amend the Freedom of Information Act to clarify procedures for public bodies to make information available to the public, to extend the time a public body has to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request, to clarify certain exemptions from Freedom of Information Act requirements, to establish the Open Government Office as the body to resolve appeals regarding Freedom of Information Act requests, to clarify reporting requirements on public body Freedom of Information Act activities, to clarify the public bodies covered by the Freedom of Information Act; to amend the Open Meetings Act to include Advisory Neighborhood Commissions and other bodies, to require that a public body’s meeting is considered open only if members of the public are permitted to attend, to create a complaint process for instances of alleged non-compliance, to create a private right of action for an individual alleging non-compliance; to amend the Open Government Office Act to change the name to the Office of Open Government, to clarify the Office’s roles and responsibilities, to require boards, commission, and task forces to make available certain information in a central location online, and to create uniform procedures for processing and tracking requests for public records.

Strengthening Government Transparency Amdt Act of 2017 by Team_Grosso on Scribd