“Liberal” Seattle Passes Strict Topless Dancing Regulations
Source: YNot.com
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
by Q. Boyer
SEATTLE, WA – The Seattle City Council approved one of the tightest sets of regulations for any major American city on Monday, banning lap dancing and the common form of tipping done by inserting bills into a performer’s G-string.
The council split 5-4 on the measures, which require that a minimum of a four foot separation is kept between patrons and dancers, that clubs maintain at least a parking-garage level of brightness in all areas, ban “private” rooms, and mandate that tips will be dropped by patrons into a tip jar, rather than handed directly to performers.
“For the most part, the attraction's gone,” said Gil Levy, an attorney representing Rick's adult nightclub in Seattle. “It will make the clubs less fun.”
The office of Mayor Greg Nickels, who requested the legislation, said the new restrictions were needed to prevent a proliferation of new clubs following s federal judge’s decision, which struck down the city’s 17 year-old moratorium on opening new strip clubs.
Some critics of the new rules have suggested that zoning laws would be a better way to regulate strip clubs than restrictions on the conduct inside the clubs, while others say the ordinances are an odd choice for a city that is otherwise tolerant and supportive of personal and civil liberties. “Without being prudes, we can be prudent,” said Councilman Nick Licata in defense of the restrictions.
In the late 1980’s, Seattle passed a 180 day moratorium on the opening of new strip clubs, which was designed to cap the number of clubs while city officials researched the effects of the clubs, and whether zoning regulations were needed. Year after year, the City Council extended the moratorium, and the number of strip clubs in the city dropped from 7 to 4.
Last month, US District Court Judge James Robart ruled in favor of a man who sued for the right to open a new club in Seattle, ruling that the moratorium was an unconstitutional restraint of free speech. As a result of the ruling, the city could end up paying the man millions of dollars in damages, regardless of the new restrictions and their enforcement.
