San Antonio – A full budget year after they approved it, the San Antonio City Council is poised to discuss what the city’s controversial Reproductive Justice Fund will cover.
Supporters have been careful to point out that the $500,000 fund is not solely meant to help fund out-of-state travel for abortion seekers, and it’s not clear yet if that use will even be part of the final contracts.
Recommended Videos
The council was briefed during April and June meetings on the broad outlines of how the fund could be used, including possibly covering travel costs for women seeking legal abortions outside of Texas, where the procedure is almost entirely banned.
The conversation at a Wednesday afternoon meeting will surround the actual contracts to be awarded but will not include a vote.
The San Antonio Metropolitan Health District received 10 proposals for using the fund and will present its recommendations Wednesday on four finalists.
Metro Health has proposed splitting the $500,000 fund between what it called “upstream, midstream, and downstream” needs.
“Transportation to abortion care” is one of eight possible needs in the “downstream” category, which also includes transportation to prenatal care, telehealth visits for sexually transmitted infections, and emergency contraception.
Metro Health had originally suggested spending $100,000 on that category but bumped it to $200,000 after feedback from council members in April.
Background
The creation of the Reproductive Justice Fund was championed by groups supportive of abortion rights during the council’s September 2023 budget discussions. It was included as an amendment before the passage of the FY 2024 budget.
Though the city avoided spelling out what the new fund would pay for, its inclusion in the budget was enough to prompt District 10 Councilman Marc Whyte to abstain from voting.
The fund was not included in the FY 2025 budget passed by council members last month.
Anti-abortion groups quickly sued the city after the FY 2024 budget vote. However, a Bexar County District Court judge dismissed the lawsuit in April after the city argued that no money had actually been spent yet.
The groups quickly appealed the decision to the Texas Fourth Court, but no decision has been made.