[argh] [flaming] [shameful] [grr]
I can't believe this city passed a law banning lap dances and nude dances in SAT. Does anyone have any additional information on this? When does the law go into effect?
Thanks,
Amethyst
Printable View
[argh] [flaming] [shameful] [grr]
I can't believe this city passed a law banning lap dances and nude dances in SAT. Does anyone have any additional information on this? When does the law go into effect?
Thanks,
Amethyst
Precious already started a thread about this in this section, but here's the city ordinance that was passed:
"39. An Ordinance repealing Ordinance Numbers 57134, 57296, 67481, 68791, and 89769; repealing Chapter 16, Article V of the City Code that pertains to the licensing and regulation of Human Display Establishments; codifying this ordinance at Chapter 21, Article VIII of the City Code; prohibiting nudity or semi-nudity or a state of nudity or semi-nudity in a public place; establishing exceptions to prosecution; establishing a licensing scheme for Human Display Establishments whereby compliance with the scheme serves as an exception to prosecution; providing penalties and enforcement; authorizing suit to enjoin illegal activity and to enforce this ordinance; providing a severability clause and an effective date. [Presented by Andrew Martin, City Attorney; Terry M. Brechtel, City Manager]"
This bascially means no all-nude clubs, no lap dances, no private rooms, and managers must have clear "line of sight" of all that goes on in the entire club.
Here's the new story as well (hope the link works):
http://www.woai.com/news/local/story...1-18268C39A5FF
BTW, all this info was taken from ASPD-San Antonio section. Somebody wrote over there that this takes effect on Monday, but I thought Precious said it would be 60 days. Who knows? You should probably ask your managers. San Antonio is going to be a bad town to be strip clubbing in for a while at least until after the politicos are done flexing their muscles. With the crime rate what it is in SA, I still think the local cops have more important things to worry about.
Truth be told, SA is really BEHIND a lot of cities when it comes to passing such ordinances. Other cities have had full nudity and contact banned for years. Has that neccesarily stopped those practices, well...not entirely.Quote:
BTW, all this info was taken from ASPD-San Antonio section. Somebody wrote over there that this takes effect on Monday, but I thought Precious said it would be 60 days. Who knows? You should probably ask your managers. San Antonio is going to be a bad town to be strip clubbing in for a while at least until after the politicos are done flexing their muscles. With the crime rate what it is in SA, I still think the local cops have more important things to worry about.
:-X ::)
Cetainly it sucks to see the rules reigned in, but there are two things to consider:
One is that the club owners could file suit, preventing enforcement of the new law until the courts say that it is constitutional. If anything, this tactic is only to buy time but in some cases, even in this post-Erie v. PAPS era, appeals can drag out for years.
Secondly, is that because its a CITY ordinance, it would not apply to locations that may have a SA address, but are technically located in unincorporated parts of Bexar County. Over time, you may see clubs relocating there to get an upper hand over those inside the city that have to deal with the more restrictive rules. Unless of course, the BC board has passed a similar law.
I'm pretty sure the club owners will be fighting this ordinance, of course.
Also, apparently the new ordinance did go into effect today.
Really puts a damper on Penthouse's Grand Opening in less than two weeks, and I can imagine they're having a hard time selling VIP memberships as well. :(
That really sucks. I'm crossing my fingers so that the prudes down here DON'T take notice.
The city councilman says they are not asking for a lot. They are full of shit.
Why did they feel the need to worry about activities inside strip clubs anyway? who put them up to this law change?
San Antonio is a fucked city anyway. It has always been waaay too conservative. These politicians know that guys come into the clubs to get full contact lap dances and know that the dancers will take huge losses in income with their bill in force.
Again as I always say, all of us MUST stand up for this business and get as many customers as possible to join us. If we have to picket churches or block streets we must be heard.
I don't like country music yet I don't want country bars closed down. How many businesses do people drive by daily that they will never go into but don't want closed? How many strip club patrons bother citizens in the neighborhood? On the other hand how many religious people solicit us in the street?
This business sucks now because we do nothing to rebel against those who rebel against us. Those of us who like the earnings we have enjoyed in the past dancing vs traditional job earnings had better fight the foes against us now!!!!
Tina, unfortunately the jealous housewives, bible thumpers, retirees, civil servants etc. who support this ordinance are registered voters. If it comes down to a simple issue of voting for a "conservative" mayor that supports the ordinance (and also other conservative planks like strict law enforcement, pro guns, anti drugs, tax cuts, anti welfare) versus a "liberal" mayor" who does not support the ordinance (and also supports liberal planks like anti guns, soft on drugs, tax increases, pro welfare), there's no way that ANY amount of organizing on the part of dancers will carry a majority.
About the only truly effective thing that dancers could do is organize an appeal fund in conjunction with all of the local clubowners to try and appeal this ordinance in a FEDERAL court. You may still not win, but it would force the city to spend big money defending its ordinance. Politicians always have to pay attention to city budgets, and if defending the ordinance will cost "more than it is worth", they may compromise and amend the ordinance removing some of the more restrictive provisions. But to do this you're probably talking $250,000 minimum in an appeal fund. I don't know how many dancers there are in San Antonio, but if the club owners put up $100,000 between them it would be up to the dancers to come up with the other $150,000. Would you and other local dancers be willing to "bet" $500 each against future lost earnings as a result of the ordinance standing as-is ? Talk to the clubowners!
Quote:
The city councilman says they are not asking for a lot. They are full of shit.
Why did they feel the need to worry about activities inside strip clubs anyway? who put them up to this law change?
San Antonio is a fucked city anyway. It has always been waaay too conservative. These politicians know that guys come into the clubs to get full contact lap dances and know that the dancers will take huge losses in income with their bill in force.
Again here everyone, lets refrain from using these broad inaccurate terms to define who our enemy is. The world is a little more complicated than "liberal versus conservative" despite what crappy TV shows like "Crossfire" and "Hannity and Colmes" teach us. I love strip clubs, but by Melonie's "planks" definition, I'd be more in line with the type of people who are trying to shut them down.Quote:
Tina, unfortunately the jealous housewives, bible thumpers, retirees, civil servants etc. who support this ordinance are registered voters. If it comes down to a simple issue of voting for a "conservative" mayor that supports the ordinance (and also other conservative planks like strict law enforcement, pro guns, anti drugs, tax cuts, anti welfare) versus a "liberal" mayor" who does not support the ordinance (and also supports liberal planks like anti guns, soft on drugs, tax increases, pro welfare), there's no way that ANY amount of organizing on the part of dancers will carry a majority.
The morality of strip clubs (or the sex industry in general) is NOT an "x-axis" (liberal vs. conservative) issue, nor is it a Democrat versus Republican issue. You will find both liberals and conservatives who enjoy strip clubs, and find both liberals and conservatives who abhor them.
What it IS is a "y-axis" issue (libertarian versus authoritarian). You will find both devoutly liberal and devoutly conservative public officials who would normally be at each others throats on other issues join forces to pass these kind of ordinances (and often unanimously). In fact, Yvonne Atkinson-Gates, who was the driving force behind passing the lap dance ordinance in Clark County, Nevada is known as an extremely liberal Democrat.
Another fact that often gets neglected is that these are LOCAL officials, and the voter turnout in local elections is downright anemic in most cities. Sometimes fewer than 20% of registered voters bother to show up to vote, and that folks is a window of opportunity, however narrow.
Those who DO show up are often these hardcore liberals and conservatives who like to impose their authoritarian views upon the rest of us, who ignorantly insist that we're "too busy" with our personal lives to care about such matters until something like this happens. Hell, I'll bet most people don't even know who their city council representative is. I don't know mine.
Furthermore, the ordinances have not gotten to the point where club owners feel need to fight them through legislative means. Its simply more cost effective to take the path of least resistance and do one or more of the following:
A.) Sue in court, if only to buy time.
B.) Disobey the law and risk the occasional bust knowing the police can't be everywhere,
C.) Move to a neighboring jurisdiction beyond the imposing government's control.
No sane club owner is going to use the "scorched earth" approach to fight these ordinances until they have to.
Catfish you're obviously correct. The only point I was trying to make with the liberal versus conservative election candidate example and dancer organizing comments is that it's impossible to separate out just the issue of dance club regulation from other issues on which potential candidates have a "stand" and registered voters have an opinion. The problem cannot be successfully fought politically, pure and simple, because any candidate who would be willing to publicly support minimal dance club regulation in the face of housewives, bible thumpers etc. calling for extreme dance club regulation is also likely to have some other fairly "unpopular" views on other subjects of great interest to the registered voters.
I do know of a couple of "exceptional" clubowners who fought ordinances with a vengeance - one fought it all the way to the US Supreme Court before losing. But these appeals occurred during the days where it was possible to get a "stay order" preventing the new laws from taking effect on the club bringing the appeal until after all of the appeals were ejudicated. This meant that the clubs named in the appeal could operate under old laws while other clubs in town who did not participate in the appeal had to abide by the new law, creating a temporary "gold mine" situation for the clubowners who brought the appeals. Today those 'stay orders" are much more difficult to come by.