The Washington Times offers two pieces on the issue today:
Say No to Smut, Booze, Sluts , and Thugs (op-ed Times May 25th)
Northeast Riled Over Strip-Club Relocation (Times May 25th)
And a letter from Ward 5 Councilmember Harry Thomas:
An Alternative Proposal (Times May 25th)
9 comments:
As you may know, Ward 1 Councilmember Jim Graham recently introduced
Bill 17-109, the "The One-Time Relocation of Licensees Displaced by
the Ballpark and Skyland Development Project Amendment Act of
2007 ." The bill would allow several strip clubs located in, or
within 2000 feet of, the footprint of the new baseball stadium and
one strip club located in the Skyland Shopping Center to relocate to
Ward 5 (near the intersection of New York and West Virginia Avenues,
NE) by exempting them from current law governing the relocation of
strip clubs. This would create a de facto adult entertainment
district in that area, which could very well stall pending
development along the vital New York Ave corridor.
3 WAYS YOU CAN HELP
Further familiarize yourself with the issue by reading the "Myth vs.
Fact" section below. And, if you are so inclined, do your own
research by all means.
Email the Councilmembers and the Mayor (see contact info at the very
bottom) and tell them not to support Bill 17-109 because current law
already allows strip clubs to relocate. The Council should not allow
those strip clubs to circumvent current law merely to save money for
strip club owners. Be sure to let them know in which Ward you you
live, so that they can see that not only Ward 5 cares about this
issue.
Forward this email to every DC resident you know.
MYTH VS. FACT
Myth: If Bill 17-109 does not pass, the strip clubs in and near the
footprint of the new baseball stadium and in Skyland cannot relocate
and will be forced out of business.
Fact: Current law already allows for the relocation of strip clubs
provided that they must relocate to the same type of zone (CM-1, CM-
2, CM-3 or M) as the one in which they currently operate or anywhere
downtown and they cannot be within 600 feet of another strip club.
The only problem is that the club owners (some of whom are
millionaires!!) just do not want to pay higher lease payments. See
the last line of this May 8, 2007 DC Examiner article on the subject:
http://www.examiner.com/printa-
715885~Graham_anticipates_resistance_to_relocating_nude_bars_in_Ward_5
.html
Myth: All of the strips that will be granted an exemption to
relocate under Bill 17-109 have been displaced by the city so the
city owes it to them to relocate them.
Fact: Of the 6 clubs that would be granted an exemption under this
bill, only 3 were directly displaced by the city -- La Cage Aux
Follies/HEAT and Ziegfield's/Secrets, which were taken by eminent
domain to make way for the new stadium; and Clancy's, which was taken
by eminent domain to make way for a new shopping destination at the
Skyland Shopping Center. The remaining 3 -- Edge/Wet, Club 55 and
Nexus Gold Club -- were not displaced by the city. They were simply
located near the new stadium and the owners of the respective
buildings decided to sell those buildings to capitalize on the new
development and higher land values in the area. This is no different
than any other business whose lease is not renewed and now faces
higher operating costs because the city is developing. It does not
make the city responsible for relocating them.
Furthermore, the owners of the buildings that were taken by eminent
domain have already been or will be financially compensated by the
city at what the court deems to be the fair value of the property.
Myth: Because the stadium was built, the Zoning Commission re-zoned
the area in which Edge/Wet, Club 55 and Nexus Gold Club are located
from CM-1, CM-2 and CM-3 (all of which permit strip clubs) to C-3-C
(which does not permit strip clubs) forcing the clubs to have to
relocate.
Fact: The area in which Edge/Wet, Club 55 and Nexus Gold Club are
located was indeed re-zoned CM-1, CM-2 and CM-3 to C-3-C in 1996 long
before -- and having nothing to do with -- the baseball stadium,
which was not even anticipated at the time. And, although the zoning
was changed, it would have been illegal to force the previously
existing strip clubs to relocate so they were allowed to stay. They
are only now leaving because prices are dramatically increasing in
that area and the building owners have decided to make more
profitable use of their buildings. Regardless of what one thinks
about it, this is the natural consequence of economic revitalization
in an area and does not necessitate special legislation.
Myth: Approving Bill 17-109 will not affect the relocation of the
strip clubs because the Zoning Commission must approve the relocation
of any strip club.
Fact: Because strip clubs are licensed through the Alcoholic
Beverage Control (ABC) Board, they must follow ABC laws including the
ABC law on relocation. Therefore, if the Council does not pass Bill
17-109 exempting certain strip clubs from the ABC law on relocation,
there will be nothing for the Zoning Commission to consider.
Misleading Assertion: Nothing in Bill 17-109 specifies Ward 5 as the
place for the strip clubs to relocate.
Fact: Although the bill is silent as to where in the city the strip
clubs could relocate, the vast majority of them have already
negotiated tentative leases in Ward 5 around the intersection of New
York and West Virginia Avenues, NE. In fact, on a recent trip to see
exactly were one of the proposed addresses is located, a
Councilmember and that Councilmember's staff were greeted by a man at
a counter, which displayed a large assortment of condoms and lube.
There was a screen dividing the room and behind the screen a
pornographic movie was being shown. This could definitely be a sign
of things to come.
CONTACT INFO
DC Public Official
Email
Adrian Fenty, Mayor
adrian.fenty@dc.gov
Vincent Gray, At-Large
(Chairman)
vgray@dccouncil.us
Carol Schwartz, At-Large
cschwartz@dccouncil.us
David Catania, At-Large
dcatania@dccouncil.us
Phil Mendelson, At-Large
pmendelson@dccouncil.us
Kwame Brown, At-Large
kbrown@dccouncil.us
Jim Graham, Ward 1
jgraham@dccouncil.us
Jack Evans, Ward 2
(Chairman Pro-Tempore)
jackevans@dccouncil.us
Mary Cheh, Ward 3
mcheh@dccouncil.us
Muriel Bowser, Ward 4
mbowser@dccouncil.us
Harry "Tommy" Thomas, Jr., Ward 5
hthomas@dccouncil.us
Tommy Wells, Ward 6
twells@dccouncil.us
Yvette Alexander, Ward 7
yalexander@dccouncil.us
Marion Barry, ward 8
mbarry@dccouncil.us
If your email separates addresses with a comma, you can cut the
following and paste it into the "To" line of your email:
adrian.fenty@dc.gov, vgray@dccouncil.us, cschwartz@dccouncil.us,
dcatania@dccouncil.us, pmendelson@dccouncil.us, kbrown@dccouncil.us,
jgraham@dccouncil.us, jackevans@dccouncil.us, mcheh@dccouncil.us,
mbowser@dccouncil.us, hthomas@dccouncil.us, twells@dccouncil.us,
yalexander@dccouncil.us, mbarry@dccouncil.us
If your email separates addresses with a semicolon , you can cut the
following and paste it into the "To" line of your email:
adrian.fenty@dc.gov; vgray@dccouncil.us; cschwartz@dccouncil.us;
dcatania@dccouncil.us; pmendelson@dccouncil.us;
kbrown@dccouncil.us; jgraham@dccouncil.us; jackevans@dccouncil.us;
mcheh@dccouncil.us; mbowser@dccouncil.us; hthomas@dccouncil.us;
twells@dccouncil.us; yalexander@dccouncil.us; mbarry@dccouncil.us
I LOVE LUCCI!
It's funny. The op-ed piece makes a big deal about how this isn't an issue about the clubs being gay clubs yet it emphasizes that fact at every turn, even suggesting they're all gay clubs where I don't think they all are.
One thing that occurred to me the other day...if Abdo really does build there...the market will once again take its course and the owners of the land at NY & W Va will also sell out, forcing the clubs to re-locate again.
Part of the story is about their being gay clubs, even if everyone offering their negative opinions now is doing so without the tiniest speck of bigotry or bias. Why? Because for many/most of the displaced clubs, the fact that they were gay clubs is the reason they were in the N/O Streets SE area to begin with. If they weren't gay clubs, they'd have had the chance to be around the city in the same way Archibalds / Camelot / other such places currently are, and thus would not have been susceptible to being cleaned out in one fell swoop by an eminent domain action. Put another way, if the clubs south of M hadn't been gay clubs, they wouldn't be in this situation.
As for lucci's using a blog comment to post 10,000,000 lines of text, I once used to wonder if there was anyone out there who truly believed that eminent domain processes can always be trusted to fairly compensate those whose property was taken. I guess there indeed are people who think the answer is yes.
I can not believe Inked published the link to the op-ed article. It was so filled with homophobia, hatred, and inaccuracies. I thought she had better judgment. I will no longer read nor recommend anyone else read this blog.
Anon 3:57, I found the op-ed a bit much, too, but isn't it best to keep an eye on all the information that's out there? I doubt that the op-ed's inclusion here was an endorsement.
Anonymous, I'm posting links to many articles to the topic, and not advocating the viewpoints of any. I don't don't generally read the Washington Times, but these articles are popping up here because they are circulating widely on the Ward 5 listserv (so I'm posting it so people see the different sources of information/propaganda on the topic [because I think we have a lot of both coming from both sides on this topic]. It isn't as if I'm only posting stuff from the Times, so relax.
inked posts stuff from all sides of the argument.
anonymous is just angry that the blog reflects opinions other than his own.
if that's the case, anonymous, start your own biased blog.
Oh no! Selling lubes and condoms!?!?!? The end of days is nigh.
Post a Comment