Therese Engelmann, 296 West 8th, explained in regard to the Women's <br />Equality Day, the event has been treated in the past as one of singing, <br />dancing, gymnastics, and holiday joyful atmosphere. It had been tra- <br />dition to have no more than one speaker and the topic chosen for this <br />year's event was "something for women"--with the choice to celebrate the <br />passage of the Displaced Homemaker Bill. Nancie Fadeley had been chosen <br />as the one speaker because she had sponsored that particular bill. It was <br />felt that if this group had been allowed to speak and present its views, <br />then others would have the right to present their opposing views and the <br />celebration might have been spoiled. The group was given the same right <br />as any other group to display its literature. In regard to the charge <br />there were no homemakers on the Commission, Ms. Englemann reported that <br />all but one of the women were homemakers. It was true that many have other <br />jobs, but all of them have homes to keep and children to raise. During <br />the Women's Equality Day speech, she said no word was spoken about abor- <br />tion, contrary to the statement made by the women testififying this evening. <br />Further, she said the Women's Commission does do many things for the <br />homemaker, citing it supported the Displaced Homemaker Bill, Womenspace, <br />women on welfare, single parents, job sharing, and divorce legislation to <br />favor women who want to stay in the home. The criterion in the statute <br />for choosing membership requires interest and expertise in the areas of <br />discrimination and she felt these were good criterion. She did not favor <br />changing the criterion to get particular points of views on particular <br />issues. <br />Andy Clement, Human Rights Specialist, replied to the charges regarding <br />the August 2 meeting of the Women's Commission, saying the Commissions <br />were never too busy, they were always open to anyone, people were never <br />denied the right to input, and in fact the Commissions were seeking <br />input from community members. In response to the charge that a staff <br />member, Betsy Merck, had appeared on a local radio station supporting ERA <br />and abortion, he said she many times throughout the presentation differen- <br />tiated her role with the City and her own personal views, noting she was <br />speaking only for herself. Mr. Clement continued that each year there are <br />three memberships for each commission open and the commissions are con- <br />stantly looking for new applicants. He suggested that women in this group <br />pick up an application in the City Manager's Office and make application <br />for the Women's Commission if they so wish. He also said he felt members <br />of the Council had attempted to be very fair in selecting members with <br />divergent views. <br />Mr. Haws thanked the women for their presentation, noting the City does <br />have a process for Commission membership selection. He felt it would <br />be a mistake to overtly select persons of one particular point of view. <br />He encouraged those persons to make application for the Commissions. <br />Mr. Delay did not question the motivation for the presentation made, but <br />did express concern that he had seen no particular important City business <br />involved. He felt Council had become a publicity forum and hoped it would <br />not encourage any group who felt it needed representation on a Commission <br />to come to Council just by making a request, thereby gaining publicity. <br />9/26/77--18 <br />141 <br />