Why I voted ‘no’ on the trans sanctuary city bill

“Worcester has gone crazy!” people say to me as I travel about the city. “When is the city council going to get back to city business?” I was bombarded by tons of responses from constituents this past week because I was one of only two votes against making Worcester a “sanctuary city” for transgender and gender-diverse people. The comments were overwhelmingly supportive, encouraging, and extremely thankful to me for “being the voice of common sense.”

This decision was not made lightly. I spent hours listening to passionate stories from members of the LGBTQ community. It became clear that while they are indeed victims, they are not victims of policies lacking from our city but rather of an agenda seeking to divide our community and use these residents as pawns.

Though my vote against the ‘sanctuary’ resolution may define part of my tenure, I am prepared to stand by it, knowing it was cast in the best interest of the whole community.

The proposed sanctuary resolution was symbolic and would not have provided additional protections beyond those already in place. The term “sanctuary” was used provocatively to draw attention, which it did — garnering both national and international headlines. However, it also risks vital federal funding necessary for critical services in our city.

Roughly one in five Worcester residents — 19.8% — live in poverty, relying on federally funded programs that provide essential housing, food, and health care support. As someone elected to represent every resident of Worcester, I must put these basic needs over symbolic gestures.

Residents have expressed to me repeatedly that they want the council to focus on tangible issues like fixing potholes, maintaining parks, enhancing public safety, managing taxes, and improving schools. These are the responsibilities we should be concentrating on to improve everyday life for all in Worcester.

Though my vote against the “sanctuary” resolution may define part of my tenure, I am prepared to stand by it, knowing it was cast in the best interest of the whole community. I aim to continue focusing on pragmatic, meaningful governance to ensure that Worcester remains a thriving, inclusive city for all who call it home.