LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission - Aug. 8, 2022

LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission Regular Meeting of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Quality of Life Advisory Commission - City of Austin Permitting and Development Center, 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Dr., Austin, Texas 78752

Agenda original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 2 pages

REGULAR MEETING of the LGBTQ QUALITY OF LIFE ADVISORY COMMISSION MONDAY, AUGUST 8, 2022 7:00 P.M. City of Austin Permitting and Development Center, Room 1401 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Dr., Austin, Texas 78752 Some members of the Commission may be participating by videoconference. Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once, either in-person or remotely, and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, contact Alyssa Parra, the Commission’s staff liaison, at 512-974-2934 or Alyssa.Parra@AustinTexas.gov. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Ryn Gonzales, Chair Kanoa Arteaga Emily Bush Charles Curry Rebecca Dreke Dr. Victor Martinez Christian Vieira Melissa Taylor, Vice Chair Marti Bier Kannou Curette Nan Dowling Katelyn Jones Darcy Rendon Brandon Wollerson AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first ten speakers signed up before the meeting is called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. MOTION TO SUSPEND ROBERT’S RULES OF ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Approve the minutes of the Commission’s Regular Meeting on July 11, 2022. Staff briefing regarding Monkeypox. Presented by Janet Pichette, Chief Epidemiologist and Assistant Director of Epidemiology and Public Health Preparedness, and Ana Urueta, 3. 4. 5. Program Manager for Public Health Emergency, Austin Public Health. (Sponsor: Staff; Strategic Outcome: Health & Environment) Staff briefing regarding Equity Considerations in Contracts and Program Funding. Presented by Neal Falgoust, Assistant City Attorney, Law Department. (Sponsor: Staff; Strategic Outcome: Government That Works for All) Staff briefing regarding the City of Austin's 2022 Disparity Study conducted by the Small & Minority Business Resources Department. Presented by Edward Campos, Director, Small & Minority Business Resources Department. (Sponsor: Staff; Strategic Outcome: Economic Opportunity & Affordability) Staff briefing regarding the new position in the Equity Office. Presented by Jeremy Garza, Commissions & Neighborhood Liaison, Equity Office. (Sponsor: Staff; Strategic Outcome: Government That Works for All) Discussion of the FY2022-23 budget process, recommendations, and endorsements. (Sponsor: Curry; Strategic Outcome: Government That Works for All) Discussion of the vacant at-large commission position. DISCUSSION ITEMS 6. 7. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 8. 9. 10. Discussion and possible action to approve the Commission's Annual Internal Review for July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2022. …

Scraped at: Aug. 4, 2022, 7:50 p.m.

Backup original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 3 pages

Policy Questions Why is your resolution called the GRACE Act? The GRACE Act stands for Guarding the Right to Abortion Care for Everyone. Austin wants to be a source of safety and grace for the people suffering under the Texas trigger ban and other laws criminalizing reproductive health choices. What is the GRACE Act? The GRACE Act is a policy recommendation in 2 parts: 1. City funds shouldn’t be used to solicit, catalog, report, or investigate reports of abortion. 2. Police should make investigating abortion their lowest priority. Why just a policy recommendation? Under Texas law and the Austin City Charter, the City Council cannot dictate to city employees how to handle a criminal case. We can declare the policy preferences of the Council and recommend that staff not use city funding, and we can recommend that they place it very low on their list of priorities. City executives, under the direct authority of the City Manager, decide whether and how to implement Council policy. How does it help if it’s just a policy recommendation? City executives, under the direction of City Manager Spencer Cronk, will implement the GRACE Act’s recommendations once it passes. Who supports the GRACE Act? Mayor Steve Adler and Council Members Vanessa Fuentes, Paige Ellis, and Kathie Tovo are our co-sponsors. Texas open meeting laws prevent us from talking to more than 4 fellow voting members about any resolution, but I can confirm everyone we have spoken with is in support. The population of Austin has demonstrated repeatedly that we are a city that supports reproductive health choices. Will the GRACE Act pass? I am confident that the City Council wants to protect abortion in Austin. CM Vanessa Fuentes’s resolution banning reproductive discrimination passed 10-1 with no discussion. There is significant support for actions like the GRACE Act on the Council and among our constituents. Legal Questions How does the GRACE Act supersede state law? The GRACE Act does not supersede state law. It is a statement of policy that provides guidelines for the city on how to prioritize enforcement of the abortion ban among hundreds of more important crimes, and it determines the amount of funds which can be dedicated to the project. It does not conflict with the state’s designation of abortion as a crime, and it does not prohibit or limit the investigation of any crime. Does the GRACE Act stop the State …

Scraped at: Aug. 4, 2022, 7:50 p.m.

Backup original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 2 pages

COMMISSION FOR WOMEN RECOMMENDATION 20220713-6: Support the GRACE Act July 13, 2022 Date: Subject: Support the GRACE Act Recommendation to Council WHEREAS, the Commission for Women (“Commission”) of the City of Austin (“City”) serves as an advisory body that advocates for and inspires the City Council (“Council”) and City Manager to prioritize women’s quality of life, so that Austin becomes the most equitable city in the nation for women and girls; and WHEREAS, all people have a basic human right to bodily autonomy, safe and effective medical treatment, and control over private medical decisions; and WHEREAS, access to safe and legal abortion is a deciding factor in long-term health, safety, and quality of life; and WHEREAS, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the 1973 landmark ruling, Roe v. Wade, which previously prevented individual states from directly banning abortion care; and WHEREAS, cisgender women and girls, transgender men and boys, non-binary people, and others who can become pregnant are restricted from access to abortion in Texas and many other states; and WHEREAS, Texas Senate Bill 8 bans abortions after six weeks gestation and allows private citizens to sue abortion providers, Texas House Bill 1280 criminalizes abortion at the felony level with a sentence of up to 99 years in prison and no exception for rape or incest, and Article 4512 from the 1925 penal code has been put forth as still in force and states that whoever furnishes the means for procuring an abortion knowing the purpose intended is guilty as an accomplice; and WHEREAS, Black and Latina individuals, and those of all races living in poverty, will likely be disproportionately impacted by bans and criminalization of abortion; and WHEREAS, children and adults who get pregnant through sexual assault, rape, incest, sex trafficking and other forms of sexual violence will experience forced pregnancies; and 1 WHEREAS, individuals who are denied abortion access are at risk of experiencing increased anxiety and other mental health issues; and WHEREAS, individuals who identify as female in Austin are experiencing higher levels of poor mental health overall than males (per data presented to the Commission by the Community Advancement Network on July 15, 2022), and transgender and nonbinary individuals in Austin are disproportionately impacted by mental health issues and access to care and resources (per the LGBTQIA+ Quality of Life study), compounding the mental health impacts for these individuals who are capable of becoming …

Scraped at: Aug. 4, 2022, 7:50 p.m.

Backup original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 4 pages

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the City of Austin honors the rights of pregnant people to bodily autonomy and control over their private medical decisions; and WHEREAS, access to a safe and legal abortion is a deciding factor in long- term health, safety, and quality of life; and WHEREAS, the Supreme Court of the United States has overturned the 1973 landmark ruling, Roe v. Wade, which previously prevented individual states from directly banning such care; and WHEREAS, on June 16, 2021, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed into law HB 1280, which criminalizes abortion at the felony level with a sentence of up to 99 years in prison and no exception for rape or incest, and which will take effect statewide 30 days after the Supreme Court judgment overturning Roe v. Wade; and WHEREAS, anti-choice legislators have weaponized the language of criminal law to stigmatize reproductive choice, and the Council considers the phrase “abortion, miscarriage, or other reproductive healthcare acts” to accurately encompass all criminalized acts under Texas laws that seek to criminalize pregnancy outcomes; and and including abortion; and WHEREAS, people have a basic human right to medical treatment, up to WHEREAS, eliminating legal access to abortion has been empirically proven to dramatically increase the risk of death, bodily injury, and infertility, especially within low-income communities and communities of color; and Page 1 of 4 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 WHEREAS, the resources of the City must always be dedicated to the health and wellbeing of its residents; and WHEREAS, the Council has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to abortion access in Resolution Nos. 20130321-045, 20140925-082, 20141120-038, 20151015-039, 20170126-045, 20181004-035, and 20210930-111; and WHEREAS, in the 1973 Roe v. Wade majority opinion, Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun stated, “[The] right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy”; and WHEREAS, the right to privacy should protect doctors, patients, and all others providing abortion-related medical care from …

Scraped at: Aug. 4, 2022, 7:50 p.m.

Backup original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 4 pages

Annual Internal Review LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission This report covers the period of 7/1/2021 to 6/30/2022 The Commission’s mission statement (per the City Code) is to: (1) Serve as an advisory body to the city council regarding issues actually or potentially affecting persons within the LGBTQ community or the LGBTQ community as a whole; (2) serve in an advisory and consultative capacity to the city council and any identified City departments with the aim of improving the ability of the City and its vendors, contractors, and consultants to serve, support, and employ the LGBTQ community; (3) recommend to the city council measures designed to enhance the health, safety, economic opportunity and affordability, mobility, cultural and learning opportunities, and government access and accountability for the LGBTQ community; (4) coordinate and/or participate in educational programs to promote equal treatment, opportunity, and understanding of persons within the LGBTQ community, and facilitate gatherings such as meetings, institutes, forums, or courses of instruction designed to lead to greater understanding and crafting of solutions for issues of concern of the LGBTQ community; (5) work with other city commissions to address issues of intersectionality; (6) create, guide, support, and evaluate LGBTQ quality of life initiatives; and (7) perform additional functions as required by the city council. Page 1 of 4 Annual Internal Review LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission Describe the board’s actions supporting their mission during the previous calendar year. Address all elements of the board’s mission statement as provided in the relevant sections of the City Code. As it relates to our mission to serve as an advisory body to the city council regarding issues actually or potentially affecting persons within the LGBTQ community or the LGBTQ community as a whole: • The Commission released our landmark LGBTQIA+ Quality of Life Study in October 2021. The Study proved that while Austin is home to a large and vibrant LGBTQIA+ community, there is much that the City can do to improve the safety, health, economic stability, access to education, and equal rights of LGBTQIA+ Austinites. Key recommendations include: o Enhancing sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI+) data collection. o Developing affordable housing opportunities. o Addressing health disparities and creating a pipeline of culturally competent providers. o Leading with anti-racist policies, investments, and strategies. o Bolstering support for queer Black, Indigenous, and people of color. o Prioritizing the needs of transgender and gender-expansive individuals. o …

Scraped at: Aug. 4, 2022, 7:50 p.m.

Backup original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 2 pages

FY 2023 Boards & Commissions Recommendations and Feedback Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer QoL Advisory Commission Recommendation Summary Department(s) Department Response Link The LGBTQ Quality of Life Commission recommends to City Council that the FY22-23 Budget continue funding of existing youth LGBTQIA+ focused mental health services at the current level of $100,000 through Austin Public Health’s Health Equity contracting portfolio. Austin Public Health APH currently has an agreement with OutYouth for mental health services for LGBTQIA Youth - $100,000. APH recently conducted an LGBTQ2IA+ Community Health Needs Assessment which included funding and promoting accessible mental healthcare resources as a key recommendation. APH will be renewing a contract with OutYouth for $15,000 for tobacco prevention programming for LGBTQ+ youth and young adults. APH funds Northwest Austin Universal Health Care $ 100,000 and YWCA $50,000 annually to provide mental health services for the Asian Pacific Islander community Housing and Planning HPD is working to update its demographic reporting requirements in order to better communicate diversity and inclusion within the city's affordable housing portfolio. link The LGBTQ Quality of Life Commission recommends to City Council that, tax-supported affordable housing development contracts include language that requires tenant application and selection processes to convey that affordable housing is supportive to all and that annual reporting of complete demographic information regarding the tenant application and selection process be required of developers and made available by the City to the community to support the perception of diversity, inclusion, and respect with regard to the City’s affordable housing efforts. *responses as of July 20, 2022 link 42 FY 2023 Boards & Commissions Recommendations and Feedback Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer QoL Advisory Commission Recommendation Summary Department(s) Department Response The LGBTQ Quality of Life Commission recommends to City Council to include in the FY 2022-23 Budget funding for one FTE position with the title of LGBTQIA+ Community Liaison (or similar) through reallocation of a current vacant position Budget Office briefing on the Adopted Budget for member Commissions of the Joint Inclusion Committee not later than October 31 of each fiscal year, 2. Budget Office briefing on the Proposed Budget process and outlook not later than November 30 of each fiscal year, Management Services Department response in progress Financial Services The Budget and Performance team is committed to provided a briefing prior to October 1. link Link link 43 *responses as of July 20, 2022

Scraped at: Aug. 4, 2022, 7:50 p.m.

Backup original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 17 pages

City of Austin Small and Minority Business Resources Overview 2022 Disparity Study Edward Campos, Director Tamela Saldana, Ph.D., Assistant Director Objectives Background Disparity Study Purpose and Objectives Quantitative & Qualitative Analysis Key Findings Study Recommendations Next Steps City of Austin | SMBR 2 Background • Jan. 2020 – Colette Holt & Associates (CHA) was contracted to conduct the 2022 Disparity Study • Spring 2020 – Two virtual Public Kick-off webinars were held • Spring 2020 – Launched disparity study website and e-mail account City of Austin | SMBR 3 Disparity Study Purpose and Objectives • Complies with constitutional mandate to regularly review evidence supporting race- and gender-based programs • Provides a legal defense if the programs are challenged • Develops accurate data for annual and contract goal setting • Gathers feedback for program improvements City of Austin | SMBR 4 Quantitative Analysis • Study analyzed FYs 2013-2018 contracts $50,000 or greater § Final Contract Data File 1,002 prime contracts totaling $826,453,073.73 842 subcontracts totaling $249,783,337.28 • Geographic market § 19 counties with Austin, San Antonio, Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston metro areas captured 82.9% of the Final Contract Data File • Product market § 204 NAICS codes in Final Contract Data File City of Austin | SMBR 5 Study Contract Data Contract Type Total Contracts Prime Contracts Subcontracts TOTAL 1,002 842 1,844 Share of Total Contracts 54.3% 45.7% 100.0% Final Contract Data File Net Dollar Value Business Type Total Contract Dollars Prime Contracts $826,453,073.73 $249,783,337.28 Subcontracts Share of Total Contract Dollars 76.8% 23.2% Source: CHA analysis of City of Austin data City of Austin | SMBR 6 City’s Utilization of M/WBEs • MBEs: 9.6% § Blacks: 1.7% § Hispanics: 5.8% § Asians: 2.0% § Native Americans: 0.1% • White Women: 6.8% • M/WBEs: 16.4% • Non-M/WBEs: 83.6% Source: CHA analysis of City of Austin data City of Austin | SMBR 7 Weighted Availability Black Hispanic Weighted Availability for City Contracts Asian MBE MBE/WBE Native American 0.4% White Women 6.5% Non- MBE/WBE 85.6% Total 100.0% 1.5% 4.7% 1.4% 8.0% 14.4% Source: CHA analysis of City of Austin data City of Austin | SMBR 8 Disparity Ratios Black 118.0% Disparity Ratios by Demographic Group White Hispanic Women 104.4% Native American 20.0%‡ 142.5% 119.5% Asian MBE 122.1% MBE/WBE 112.7% Non- MBE/WBE 97.9% Disparity Ratio ‡ Indicates substantive significance Formula: DR = U/WA DR – Disparity Ratio U – Utilization Rate WA – Weighted Availability …

Scraped at: Aug. 4, 2022, 7:50 p.m.

Backup original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 18 pages

Equity Considerations in Contracts and Program Funding Austin Arts Commission February 24, 2022 Neal Falgoust, Assistant City Attorney Purpose • Discuss legal risks associated with using race, gender and protected-class criteria in determining awards of contracts and program funding. 2 Why Now? • Recent federal court decisions that put race-focused programs at risk. • Law Department deliberative process. • Briefing to City Council. 3 Acknowledgement • History of intentional racial segregation – 1928 Master Plan and “Negro District.” • Oppression of BIPOC – 1954 Federal Housing Act, “urban renewal,” and seizing of Black-owned land. • City Council has committed the City to correcting its racist practices. (Resolution 20210304-067) 4 City’s Programs • As part of Project Connect, community members developed displacement mitigation strategies and an equity tool to guide decision making. (“Nothing About Us Without Us”) • EDD also wants an equity focus for the Cultural Arts and Heritage Tourism grant programs. 5 Legal Foundation • 14th Amendment – Equal Protection Clause • No government may “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” 6 “Tiered Scrutiny” • Strict Scrutiny (Race, National Origin, Religion, Alienage) – Government must demonstrate the policy is narrowly tailored to meet a compelling purpose. • Intermediate Scrutiny (Gender, Sex, Sexual Orientation?) – Government must demonstrate the policy is substantially related to an important purpose. • Rational Basis (Age, Disability, Wealth, Felony Status) – The policy must have a rational connection to a legitimate interest. 7 Strict Scrutiny Any government program that takes race into consideration faces strict scrutiny by the courts. Strict scrutiny is the most rigorous judicial review. Courts start with presumption that policy is invalid and government must prove its interests. 8 Compelling Government Interest The government must demonstrate: • actual discrimination in the relevant market, and • that the government either actively or passively perpetuated the discrimination. 9 Narrowly Tailored The government must demonstrate: • it considered other race-neutral policies; • race-neutral policies failed to achieve the compelling interest. 10 City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. • “Generalized assertions” of past racial discrimination would not justify “rigid” quotas; • 30 percent quota could not be connected to “any injury suffered by anyone;” • Race-neutral measures must be seriously considered. 11 Evidence Acceptable to a Court Disparity studies are conducted to determine if there is discrimination in the studied market and if the government is an active …

Scraped at: Aug. 4, 2022, 7:50 p.m.