There seems to be a lot of energy spent on the issue of strip-clubs in our city recently.
First, and most obviously, there is the recent proposal put together by Councilwoman Smith and local blogger Bram Reichbaum. This has been fairly extensively covered and criticized. Most notably here, also here and here.While there seems to be a fair bit of criticism in the comments section of all these articles, Reichbaum and Smith may have modified some of the more controversial aspects of this legislation - I understand they are even in talks with the dancer who who was featured so prominently in the CP article to make this law more friendly to dancers.
Since the rest of the city also seems to be focused on the issue of adult entertainment this proposal looks especially timely. If it can get the traction in needs to get passed this seems like it would be a real victory for Councilwoman Smith. First she gets to introduce a very strong piece of legislation that not only makes her look bold but also sets the stage for interest in this issue in the media and around the city. Next she is able to reign in the initial proposal after talks with various unseemly parties. This not only presents her as reasonable but also worldly.
On the other hand, while strip clubs seem to be an easy political target, she this does risk coming off as something of a prude or school marm. This may be seen as just ruining everyone's fun! It should also be noted that this is Councilwoman Smith's first real piece of legislation so it really is acting as introduction to her leadership. Eyes are definitely on her!
Also showing an interest in the issue of strip clubs is Councilwoman Rudiak. Apparently the zoning board is considering allowing the ButaBing adult cabaret on Rt 51 reopen. I must admit, as long as I have lived in this city I have always noticed the garish neon pink ButaBing as I drove to Uniontown, but I never remember it actually being open and in business. It has always looked like it was in such disrepair that I was surprised to see it still standing whenever I drove by again. I don't know much about the opposition in this case but I would expect that, as lax as zoning seems to be on Rt 51, the request to reopen would be approved. Still wth so much focus on this and with a member of council taking an interest, who can say?
Finally there is this article. Pittsburgh Public Schools and the Cultural Trust have begun legal action to reverse the recent zoning board decision allowing Blush Nightclub to expand their business. A review of the article indicates that the points are being used to leverage the reversal appear pretty niggling and bureaucratic. They allege that a one day delay in signing the decisions made in a previous meeting should have forced the rejection of Blush's request. So far, it seems as though the case they are making is not too persuasive.
I can't help but wonder how a cash strapped school-district, which has closed or consolidated schools across the area, and has seen its budget slashed by our new governor to the point of breaking its commitment to a group of bright up-and-coming educators, can realistically come up with the money to sue the deep pockets of the adult industry. Where is the cost justification measured in terms of better educated students? I hope to learn more about this if and when the lawsuit unfolds. I can only hope that the Cultural Trust is the driving and financial support behind this and the School Board has just signed on in support.
Interestingly, I could find no record of the decision to file this challenge and appeal in the minutes of the School Board's meetings. Perhaps this is just my poor search skills, but you would think that when a organization knew it was going to attract attention with a story they would have the good sense to link to information about it on their site.
Update: It seems that things did get somewhat heated at the ButaBing's zoning board meeting. Of course, the owner claims that this was a political ploy. It is hard not to feel some sympathy for that position - this looks pretty unusual. In fact, if the city's zoning board is that politicized, one has to wonder if the late signing of Blush's decision was not designed to allow for the challenge that the Cultural Trust and School Board are mounting. I am sure we will be hearing more on this as time goes by.
3 comments:
It'd be a mistake to say Kail-Smith's legislation has already been altered to reflect the well-intentioned feedback its introduction has generated. While some of the stuff is already out (notably the "60 minute rule"), from here on out we're going to need the public's and the rest of Council's formal help to strike the right balance. I'm anxious to get that work underway, but the Planning bit needs to work its way through Planning first.
Thanks for the link to the full article on the Butta Bing follies. If Kirk Burkley is saying there's a problem with the original occupancy permit, it sounds like the applicants have a steep uphill battle regardless of anything else.
Bram,
Well with council out for the next month the wait while it moves through planning couldn't have come at a better time.
As I understood it the 60min rule was thrown out because it would make for difficult compliance checking. I agree that having someone stand around for an hour with a stopwatch doesn't seem to be a very productive use of anyone's time.
Would you care to speak to the feedback that you got from meeting with the woman in the CP article? I saw that most of the criticism the proposal was receiving seemed focused on not burdening the entertainers with restrictions that could hurt their earnings. Have your meetings with the industry and with entertainers had any results in that arena?
I think you are right about the ButaBing. With all of the focus in the city on that issue right now, and with Rudiak weighing in, I expect that getting approval will be really tough. I also cant help but wonder if zoning is trying to cover its ass after the Blush decision and the subsequent challenge. That said, as you have pointed out the previous zoning practice around these clubs was illegal. I wonder if that fact will have any effect on the argument that the original permit didn't cover its use as adult entertainment. I could also imagine someone arguing that tolerating it as adult entertainment for so many years confers a right to continue to use it in that fashion.
I didn't attend the meeting with MM personally. But generally from the feedback about being reduced to a "backdrop", the recommendations probably will include that the 6-foot rule be reduced to something that allows for closer interaction, but still significant enough that No Contact can be easily inspected and be well-understood by all. Other stuff is on the table as well but we're not there yet.
Post a Comment