In case you missed it, over the past few days there has been a story in the Wausau Daily Herald about Wausau’s Plan Commission tabling a request for rezoning for a building project. The building in question would be a shelter, a shelter for women who were victims of domestic abuse.
I am trying to not editorialize here, but it seems nearly impossible to remain impartial. The Women’s Community worked to raise millions of dollars to build a place where women will be protected from domestic violence, AFTER they have become victims. Our fellow citizens (more than 170 “neighbors”) created a petition to block it from being built in their neighborhood. I find this sad, and an embarrassment.
According to the WDH, the Plan Commission “tabled a plan to rezone the site at 100 W. Campus Drive, thus allowing further discussion between residents and shelter officials. Joe Gehin, city public works director, said the signatures could be sufficient to require that the plan receives support from three-fourths of the City Council if passed by the Plan Commission.”
I would hope that the City Council exhibits more concern and respect for this project than the “neighbors” who feared they would be up to their yin-yangs in abusive spouses disturbing their quiet little spot of the world. It’s literally the NIMBY syndrome at work here. And, how this all shakes out will say a lot about how much we care about victims of abuse.
mapletownshrub
3:00 pm on August 21st
I completly agree with you. Some one should get people together down on the 400 block or at the NTC parking lot to have a demonstration for the Women’s Community.
Check out the blog on WSAU website. What Mr. Conley fails to see is that that area is not a quiet neighborhood. On one end on Campus Drive is Fleet Farm, NTC, and the Other is a Gravel Pit with Dump Trucks coming out frequently and this is only about a half mile street. Not to mention the 5 assisted living homes in the middle near where the center is proposed.
So let me get this right Old people are ok but abused women and children aren’t?
John H. Fischer
3:03 pm on August 21st
I think it would be worth while to actually also look at the discussion going on on the Daily Herald’s website (no reason why CW and WDH need to compete… they share a number of visitors/contributors).
The article (along with 39 comments at the time I am posting this) can be found at http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080821/WDH0101/808210589
If you are wondering who would put their pen to paper to oppose this, the actual petition itself can be found at http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/assets/pdf/U0116077821.PDF
Something I would love to see someone get more info on (and wouldnt it be cool if CW could “scoop” WDH (again)… and that would be a comment that part of the reason for all those names on the petition was because of the commericial devleopment that was a part of the plan in addition to the shelter.
Huh? The minutes won’t be posted for a while and NOTHING in the daily herald article mentioned that the UDD request went beyond the shelter.
John H. Fischer
3:06 pm on August 21st
maple.. how about a hyperlink to that.. I can never find anything on their site.. or at least anything worth finding
mapletownshrub
3:13 pm on August 21st
http://www.wsau.com/StationFiles/Blog/News/
Sorry.
John H. Fischer
3:15 pm on August 21st
Thank you .. found it…
I did hit the reply button and said this
“Take a good look at that area… NTC is right there… in the next few blocks are apartment buildings and assisted living facilities for the elderly. The neighbors immediately adjacent to the parcel may have a point as you stated… however look at the names and addressed on the petition… although all on that end of town, you would find it hard to argue that 90% of the names on there will be in any way impacted.
Also, this is not a blanket rezoning… it is a UDD rezoning which can have a number of special conditions put on it.
The number one concern appeared to be security and the risk of crime. One would think that this being the location of the shelter, this area would now be more regularly patrolled actually increasing safety.
There is a difference between putting a factory in the middle of a single-family residential neighborhood and putting a large residential-type facility on the outskirts of town where there is a mix of uses, including large residential type facilities.”
Dino Corvino
3:25 pm on August 21st
Its terrible. These are women in need. A safe place.
Dino Corvino
3:25 pm on August 21st
Thanks Shrub.
Erik Cieslewicz
3:29 pm on August 21st
Very cool to see the story I’m covering today be on the front of The CW as well. I think this story needs more attention, and moreover, I’d like to hear more from the opponents of the re-zoning. We found a lot of folks that were in favor of the new shelter more than willing to talk on camera, but none of the opponents would go on camera to tell their side of the story.
Alex
11:32 pm on August 21st
This is one of those things that make me ill. I can’t think of any valid reason to oppose.
If you are, you should be ashamed.
Barry Liss
6:57 am on August 22nd
Nice piece Dino…Pete’s (’Our View’) editorial in the Herald discussed education and facts, especially statistics and it’s bland with no punch – it’s not irrelevant because it’s valuable information…however, it’s not an editorial either because it takes no risk to say we need to learn more about a specific subject.
…however Dino, you uncover the moral implications of the narrative more acutely when you use the words ’sad’ and ‘embarrassment’…these are attack words — intrinsically emotive they convey rhetorical criticism…
For my part, I would call attention to the contaminating of the language of ‘public safety’ as motive…and note with good humor and irony the pervasive yet too rarely mentioned pseudo-religious hypocrisy that festers amongst and within my fellow citizens…
Barry
PackOne
9:47 am on August 22nd
“rarely mentioned pseudo-religious hypocrisy that festers amongst and within my fellow citizens…”
Amen to that.
Cheryl Mathis
6:45 pm on August 23rd
I think it’s a shame that domestic abuse shelters are thought of as poorly as prisons. That’s the whole point of the new building, to create a better atmosphere.
TV shows only the bad side of shelters. Violent husbands are often stalking the homes in hopes of getting a chance to reconcile or a chance to teach the woman a lesson. Women answer the door, frightened and downcast, scared to peek out the windows.
Of course the women are seeking shelter from someone unsavory. They will be scared and in need of a village to rebuild their lives. Rather than just avoid the unfortunate parts of life, I feel that this community should open their arms to these people. Too few of us actually care enough to help; it’s a shame that they aren’t willing to do a small thing like allowing a shelter to be built so that the people who care can actually do their job.
I definitely want to know more about the zoning issue.
Barry Liss
7:42 am on August 24th
…this is not a commercial site…’zoning’ in this case is a red-herring…put in administrative terms the ‘business’ of a shelter is essentially residential…