WORCESTER — The Worcester City Council has formally declared the city a “sanctuary city“ for transgender, nonbinary, and LGBTQIA+ individuals, approving a resolution to safeguard access to gender-affirming healthcare and prohibit the use of city resources for enforcing measures against trans individuals.
The resolution, introduced by Worcester resident Allie Cislo on behalf of Queer Residents of Worcester & Our Allies, was approved in a 9-2 vote on Tuesday night following weeks of public testimony. It designates Worcester as “a sanctuary city and a place of safety for transgender and gender-diverse people.”
A Response to Federal Restrictions
The resolution was introduced in response to a series of executive orders issued by President Donald Trump, which have narrowed the federal definition of gender and restricted access to gender-affirming care.
On January 22, 2025, Trump signed an executive order limiting the government’s recognition of gender to only male and female, effectively erasing legal recognition of transgender and nonbinary individuals. A week later, on January 29, 2025, he signed another order banning gender-affirming medical treatments for minors under 19, eliminating access to puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender youth. That same day, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management directed federal agencies to replace all references to gender with sex on official forms, further restricting legal acknowledgment of transgender identities.
“The trans, nonbinary, and LGBTQIA+ community in Worcester and nationally are being attacked by President Trump,” Cislo stated in the resolution, describing these executive actions as direct threats to the rights and safety of gender-diverse individuals. The resolution underscores that these federal measures create a hostile environment for LGBTQIA+ individuals nationwide.
As part of its commitment to protecting trans rights, the resolution states that “no city resources, including, but not limited to, time spent by employees, officers, contractors, or subcontractors while on duty, or the use of city property, shall be utilized for detaining persons for solely seeking or providing gender-affirming care.” It also prohibits Worcester officials from “cooperating with or providing information to any individual or out-of-state agency or department regarding the provision of gender-affirming healthcare.”
Mayor Joseph Petty spoke in favor of the resolution, condemning the federal government’s efforts to roll back protections for transgender individuals.
“I don’t care what your beliefs are… taking the word ‘transgender’ out of the vocabulary of the federal government is just plain wrong,” Petty said. “Not here in the city of Worcester.”
Emotional Testimonies From the Community
Dozens of Worcester residents filled the council chamber for the fourth consecutive week, urging the council to take action.
“This is my home,” said Brynn Cotter, a trans woman. “I love this city because in this city, I find my sanctuary.”
Others emphasized the increasing dangers facing transgender individuals in the U.S.
“Once again, like all of us, I’m standing before you, demanding — no longer asking — for my humanity to be recognized,” said Cayden Davis.
During the meeting, Reverend Brae Adams, pastor of Worcester’s United Congregational Church, described the backlash she faced after publicly supporting the resolution.
Adams said she received “so much hate” after she spoke at the prior week’s city council meeting that she had to take down everything she had posted on social media. She then used her allotted two minutes of speaking time for a moment of silence to honor “those who have lost their lives and those currently living in terror,” while holding up a sign that said, “City Council, what are you afraid of?”
Political Divisions and Councilor Allegations
The measure passed despite opposition from At-Large Councilors Donna Colorio and Morris Bergman, who raised concerns about potential funding risks for Worcester organizations and nonprofits.
Councilor Thu Nguyen, Massachusetts’ first openly nonbinary elected official, returned to the Worcester City Council chamber Tuesday night after a month-long hiatus, during which they cited transphobia and a “discriminatory and toxic council culture” as reasons for stepping away. Nguyen previously alleged that Mayor Joe Petty and Councilor Kate Toomey misgendered them publicly and claimed that Councilor Candy Mero-Carlson repeatedly referred to them using the pronoun “it.”
More: Worcester city councilor takes break from office citing transphobia and toxic politics
In a January 16, 2025, Instagram post, Worcester City Councilor Thu Nguyen alleged experiencing transphobia and discrimination from fellow councilors and called for the City of Worcester’s Chief Equity Officer to launch an investigation into what they described as a discriminatory and toxic council culture. They cited instances of being misgendered by Mayor Joseph Petty and Councilor Kate Toomey and claimed that Councilor Candy Mero-Carlson repeatedly referred to them as “it.”
At the February 13, 2025, City Council meeting, Councilor Etel Haxhiaj introduced a proposal to hire a third-party investigator with LGBTQIA+ and BIPOC expertise to examine concerns of transphobia and discrimination within the council. The measure, which echoed Nguyen’s earlier call for an independent review, was ultimately voted down.
A Celebration of Resistance
Ahead of the meeting, more than 100 people gathered outside City Hall for a rally organized by Queer Residents of Worcester & Our Allies. The event, dubbed “Queer Ball at City Hall,” featured poetry readings, speeches, and a drag performance by Ms. Lady Sabrina, an LGBTQ+ advocate who has performed since 1986.
“Fear should never be acted on,” Sabrina said. “[Council members] were elected to protect all of the members of the community, all. Not cherry-pick.”
Council Vice-Chair Khrystian King defended the resolution as a critical step toward ensuring civil rights protections for trans individuals.
“It comes down to constitutional rights, humanity, and civil rights,” King said. Later adding, “There should be no hesitation for us as a city to ensure that we’re not providing— and I’m reading from the resolution— any information to any individual or out-of-state agency or department regarding the provision of gender-affirming healthcare.”