|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The North Fair Oaks Community Council will not support a buffer zone around a local reproductive facility after the proposal failed to gain the necessary support from members.
Council member Ever Rodriguez spoke in favor of the letter to the board. Though Rodriguez made a motion to support the letter, none of the other seven council members moved to second it, which meant that members could not vote on the proposal one way or the other.
The proposal, which was introduced by Council Chair Brooks Esser, would have involved sending a letter to ask the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to create a protective perimeter around the Planned Parenthood at 2907 El Camino Real in unincorporated Redwood City.
"I reached out to Mayor [Giselle] Hale with the suggestion that the North Fair Oaks Community Council should concurrently write a letter to the board, given that the facility actually lies within the borders of North Fair Oaks and serves members of both communities," said Esser during the May 26 council meeting.
Buffer zones are an established protective measure that create an enforceable radius around the entrance to a reproductive facility within which certain activities—protesting, harassment, shouting, impeding entry—are forbidden. Buffer zones, like those proposed or implemented in local cities including San Mateo, San Jose, San Francisco and Oakland, can vary in size and scope, according to Lauren Babb, vice president of public affairs for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte.
The discussion came just under a month after Politico published a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion on the future of Roe v. Wade revealing the possibility of a reversal on federal abortion rights.
According to the Planned Parenthood – Redwood City Health Center's website, the facility offers abortions, birth control, STD testing, men's health care, transgender hormone therapy and several other types of services.
"As a male, I want to bend over backwards to support women," Rodriguez said, acknowledging that Planned Parenthood provides services to people of any gender. "I think taking a stand to support reproductive access and services is a good thing."
Vice Chair Blair Whitney, the only other council member to comment on the proposal, questioned its necessity.
"I don't feel like this is a hot issue for the community," he said. A resident of the neighborhood near the Planned Parenthood facility, Whitney, said that "there's some nice older folks from the faith community that are on the park bench on occasion" but added that the protests he's seen are "really low-key and very civil."
Babb said that the number of protestors at the North Fair Oaks Planned Parenthood facility is inconsistent and hard to track. However, she noticed an uptick in activity after Donald Trump was elected in 2016 and expects a similar surge if and when Roe v. Wade is overturned.
"We are expecting that these red state protesters…they will lose their regular sites," she said. She said that those protestors, from nearby places like Arizona and Texas may travel across state lines to continue their efforts at facilities in more liberal parts of the country. "We have some sense that they're just going to set up shop in random places like California and cause problems."
Invoking concerns around the First Amendment, Whitney described the proposal to create a buffer zone around the facility as potentially infringing on the right to free speech and "kind of a big deal."
"It's troubling," he said. "I realize that it's an election season, and it's real(sic) important for folks to take a political stand and get noticed, but I think we're jumping ahead.
"It's like we're preemptively retaliating against a problem that we're sure is going to happen," he added.
Rodriguez agreed that protests at the local facility tend to be "civil and respectful." However, he said it was his opinion that "reproductive rights are very personal, sensitive, emotional issues that do not need to have added trouble from third parties trying to meddle on whatever decision anybody wants to make with their bodies."
According to Babb, most demonstrations are limited to holding signs and verbal protests. But she said that she has seen protestors throw objects at windows, scream at patients and even physically harm staff.
Babb also said that while the First Amendment protects some forms of protests, others directly violate a state law known as the California Freedom of Access to Clinic and Church Entrances Act, or FACE Act. Enacted in 2001, the act "outlines what you can and can't do in front of a reproductive health facility," according to Babb.
She added that many of the behaviors named in the legislation—interfering with a person's free movement, intimidation, obstructing entry—are seen outside of reproductive clinics daily. She said that introducing a buffer zone can help outline and enforce what's permissible.
"We're just trying to prepare for the unknown and keep people safe in the ways that make sense," she said. "And having sort of clear expectations on both sides allows us to do that."
In the draft letter, Esser referenced a similar letter that the Redwood City Council unanimously approved to send to the Board last month and asked "that provisions be included in the county action plan which would protect patients of the clinic from potential harassment by protesters." He quoted Supervisor David Canepa, who voiced support for the buffer zone, citing "an uptick of protests at clinics such as the Planned Parenthood on 2907 El Camino."
The letter also noted that the buffer zone should not violate the constitutional right to free speech.
On May 14, just two weeks after the Roe v. Wade draft opinion leak, the board of supervisors adopted a resolution affirming the county's "unwavering support for women's reproductive freedom and healthcare policy." Supervisors Dave Pine and Warren Slocum also committed to a county action plan to support unfettered access to reproductive care.
The board of supervisors will vote to approve the action plan, including additional financial resources and a decision about the proposed buffer zone, on June 14.
