Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 7/11/2023
EASTHAMPTON — For much of its July 5 meeting, the Easthampton City Council conducted a public hearing over an ordinance titled “Safe and fair access to legally protected reproductive and gender-affirming health care services.”
Under the ordinance — proposed by councilors Owen Zaret, Thomas Peake and Salem Derby, members of the council’s Ordinance Committee — the city would codify its ability to distribute information provided by the state around reproductive health care services and gender affirming health care services.
According to the ordinance, this information “serves to provide the public with an understanding of what are legally accessible and protected services, how to access those services, as well as any advisories from the commonwealth pertaining to such services.”
All of the related information will be posted electronically to the city’s website and may include information about limited-services pregnancy centers, which are defined in the ordinance as places that provide pregnancy-related services that do not include FDA-approved contraceptive drugs or devices, pregnancy testing, obstetric ultrasounds, prenatal care, abortion or sterilization. This also includes information about “entities performing reproductive services in the commonwealth, as well as advisories, notices or other general information that is relevant to reproductive and gender affirming health care.”
The ordinance would require any city employee who provided the information or is aware of information related to reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services with any individual, even those that are not residents, to keep that information confidential from any third party.
The full ordinance is available at: https://www.easthamptonma.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_07052023-2017.
During the public comment portion of the hearing, residents of Easthampton and from around Western Massachusetts spoke both for and against the ordinance, with much of the debate circling around abortion and the LGBTQ+ community. Many spoke to the protection of the Bethlehem House, a nonprofit organization that offers free pregnancy resources, thinking that the ordinance would help the city to do away with the organization.
Derby said that the ordinance will not apply to the Bethlehem House.
“This ordinance will not impact the Bethlehem House at all. As stated on the Bethlehem House website, they provide supplies for mom and baby up to 18 months, but they do not offer pregnancy-related services as defined in this ordinance. This does not apply to them from the get-go unless they change what they’re doing,” he said. “While Bethlehem House does call itself a pregnancy center, it mainly provides resources for expecting mothers.”
Peake added that the only way any business could be shut down is through a consumer complaint to the Attorney General’s office, a measure that already existed prior to the creation of this ordinance.
Derby also defined what the ordinance will do to protect private information as well as distribute it.
“What this ordinance does is two things, one it directs city employees not to reach out to other entities to inform them of personal medical decisions of people they might interact with, if they do it will be referred to human resources. Two, it directs the city to post any relevant bulletins from the state of Massachusetts on the Health Department practices of any reproductive health care,” Derby said.
Zaret explained why the Ordinance Committee has been working to put together the ordinance.
“The landscape of reproductive and gender affirming health care has changed substantially in the past year. What is legal and accessible and how to access it may change, and we have an obligation from a public health perspective to make sure the public is aware of this information from the state,” he said. “The lack of access to this information affects, typically, the most marginalized or minoritized populations that are the most vulnerable to either the lack of information or disinformation, and they suffer the most repercussions financially, socially and medically.”
Mayor Nicole LaChappelle said that she was against the ordinance because it could open the city up to lawsuits.
“For me, reproductive rights are human and civil rights, they’re without question. And here the question is for a municipality is it in the best situation to execute such an ordinance? While I recognize the effort of the City Council in crafting language, I have the obligation to review municipal legislation for conformity to the city’s charter, to the administrative mandate of my office and the ability to execute,” she said. “Even with the city solicitor’s assuring the ordinance’s legal merit, we know it will face legal challenges by well-funded organizations intent on limiting the rights of women.”
LaChappelle added that with many other projects underway in the city, the city should not open itself to legal challenges when the state is already working on these issues.
“The work and gap around these issues is being taken up at the state level as well as the work of many not-for-profits. Additional legal exposure is very concerning, and specifically concerning the number of projects we have in front of us including housing, an expanding public health department and transportation,” she said.
Derby said the ordinance has been in the works for over a year and he is comfortable with the legal vetting process.
“I disagree that this puts us in any legal liability because this is just codifying things that we already do. This ordinance has been reviewed by the city attorney and his feedback has been incorporated into the final document, so this has been vetted,” he said.
In response to the public comments against abortion, in an ideal world, Councilor Brad Riley said he would agree but explained that he believes this is not an ideal world.
“If the situation were different, and I felt that women who have children in Easthampton could afford an $1,800 apartment, who could afford organic food to make sure that their children are healthy, if I thought that they could pay their utility bills in the winter, then of course I would be in favor of this,” he said. “I cannot in my role as a city councilor vote on something that says people in my community must live a life of poverty and suffering because of the beliefs of somebody else, I can never reconcile that.”
As the lone woman on the council, Councilor Koni Denham thanked her colleagues for their work drafting the ordinance and their allyship before discussing her experience as a member of the LGBTQ+ community.
“In the last year as a member of the LGBTQ community I have watched my community nationally be harassed, I have watched suffering, I have watched fear and I have watched harm on a variety of different levels and that, as a member of that community, is hard to watch, it’s painful,” she said. “As a woman and a member of the gay and lesbian community, I don’t have the same rights you do.”
Denham added that while Massachusetts has protections not present in other states, she was going to vote in favor of the ordinance to further affirm those rights in the city.
“In Massachusetts I have those rights, but it’s not something that’s shared nationally, and I am aware of that, and it’s very difficult for me to watch that. This ordinance before us, I’m going to support it because I want to affirm the rights of people. This is my ability to affirm the rights of individuals to make whatever choice it is,” she said. “This affirmation is for people who want to go to Bethlehem House and receive the services that you offer. For the people who are in fear, for the people who live in poverty, for people who are marginalized, minoritized, who do not have that access and do not feel safe, what I am doing as a member of this council is affirming this right to the information that is outlined in the ordinance.”
She added, “I want to do right by people by letting them know that these are the services you have available because based on whatever circumstances you have, whatever fear you might be living in, whatever hardship you might be experiencing, this is an option for you, just like Bethlehem is an option.”
Before coming to a vote, Council President Homar Gomez said the council would continue to support Denham.
“I concur with everything Councilor Denham said. I applaud you for your comments, I just want to let you know we are going to support you 100%. You can count on us because we are here to support you and not just support you but protect you, too. We are going to do whatever we have in our power to make that possible,” Gomez said.
Ultimately the council approved the ordinance with a 6-0 vote while Councilor JP Kwiecinski abstained.
The full meeting is available for viewing at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyY9Keu3ges.