|
REGULAR MEETING April 9, 2018
<br /> me, I am able to identify what those different elements are. The first point regards safety and
<br /> whether this is, indeed, an intimidating atmosphere. I think there is a predominance of evidence
<br /> that points out this will become an intimidating atmosphere.I won't belabor that point. My second
<br /> point,however, is one (1)that has come up since listening to the comments this evening. The idea
<br /> that the Women's Care Center would provide the only real care that women will get on the West
<br /> Side strikes me as false. This is because at 2806 Lincoln Way West, we have the Community
<br /> Wellness Partners who provide exactly the same type of services that I've been hearing talked
<br /> about this evening. They just received an $11 million grant as one (1) of twenty-eight (28) other
<br /> people who applied from the ISDH to continue providing those services. So the idea that Women's
<br /> Care Center will be the only place such services could be provided causes me to wonder about my
<br /> third point. It is easy to talk about how personal should remain personal and shouldn't become
<br /> political. But, the personal is political and we see it happen all the time with these types of
<br /> decisions.We watched it happen historically as what seemed like perfectly reasonable and humane
<br /> language we've used this evening such as common good, objective knowledge, service for all and
<br /> choices. It masks what happens when we don't have all of the information we need in order to
<br /> recognize the interaction between the personal and the public. In this instance, that interaction is
<br /> happening around the issues that have to do with the Human Right of having health care that is
<br /> necessary. Being able to get preventative,and holistic care without having the opportunity to
<br /> choose life was the wording I heard. Each time someone spoke, they did, indeed, talk about the
<br /> many opportunities except one(1)that they won't talk about. They will talk about everything else,
<br /> and I am sorry, but that is not choice. Also, if we are saying that this is on behalf of all these
<br /> minority women who otherwise wouldn't have any care, it takes me back to point number two (2)
<br /> which is that this care is provided by a firm that focuses on minority women that just got a lot of
<br /> money to continue providing the type of care we have heard described this evening. It is necessary
<br /> for us to look beyond the rhetoric and recognize the decision that faces us here is whether we will
<br /> codify these zones of conflict, and therefore, continue making it not possible for women to receive
<br /> the type of care necessary to talk about reproductive justice in healthcare.
<br /> Pam Claeys, 1106 Bellevue Avenue, South Bend, IN, stated, Thank you for this opportunity and
<br /> spending your Monday evening listening to the many comments.I am here because I totally oppose
<br /> this rezoning request. I speak to you from my experience in neighborhood leadership, in
<br /> transparency, in conflict management and resolution and maintaining residential property values,
<br /> as well as my experience in clinic defense. On the surface, this appears to be a regular rezoning
<br /> request. The analysis that you see says that it will correspond well with adjacent commercial and
<br /> office properties; I beg to differ. You heard Mr.Nussbaum. This was a strategic location. Putting
<br /> a CVS next to a Walgreens, it is more than that. Women's Care Center has purposefully and
<br /> manipulatively targeted this purchase to secure a place right next to the Whole Women's Health
<br /> Alliance. Now the Women's Care Center says they do not have protestors. They are absolutely
<br /> right. They don't have protestors. They wash their hands of protestors, but they are right. At the
<br /> former clinic on Ironwood Circle,they were not their protestors. The protestors that were there are
<br /> magnetized to this issue. I've seen it as recently as February of this year at a protest at our
<br /> Congresswoman's Walorski's Office. People across the street with ten (10) by twenty (20) big
<br /> pictures,loud voices and speakers. That harassment will be there. It has been there for a long time.
<br /> To be clear, this is not a First Amendment issue. Both parties could really exist next door to each
<br /> other. The problem is the unplanned, uncontained, unlawful harassment that is going to be
<br /> magnetized to this site. And please, don't close your eyes about that because it's going to happen.
<br /> Many of you don't remember the late 80s and 90s, when outside agitators came in. Police had to
<br /> be called. I referenced an article in the South Bend Tribune from March 2016 that I hope you have
<br /> in your packet.It describes a history of trespassing,intimidation,restraining order violations,mass
<br /> arrests for blocking access to the previous abortion clinic, locking themselves in the clinic, and
<br /> spraying butyric acid. They were not Women's Care Center protestors. They were protestors of
<br /> the clinic. That is going to happen if you allow this rezoning. I can personally testify that providing
<br /> clinic defense was dangerous, even with police protection. Police were called multiple times and
<br /> several times daily to enforce the restraining order that had to be gotten to keep the sidewalk
<br /> counselors away from the guests trying to access the clinic. You heard Carmella. As recently as a
<br /> couple of years ago and early 2016 there were sidewalk protestors and there had to be clinic
<br /> defense workers to safely guide them. Just because there is a boundary line, there is a room
<br /> between there and the street. There is plenty of room for protestors and they are going to spill onto
<br /> Lincoln Way. I know that and you probably realize that in the back of your head. This is going to
<br /> cost us money, it is going to be a safety issue, a drain on the South Bend Police Department and
<br /> other first responders and granting this request would be a disastrous financial and safety issue for
<br /> 20
<br />
|