Editor’s note: In NPN’s recent post about Cap Video’s plans for its storefront NPN takes to task Cap Video. NPN suggests that the store front plans are prohibited because of their darker sexually suggestive nature, among other things, which NPN contends conflicts with Cap Video’s prior representations. The "plans" were photos taken of a Cap Video store front at another location. Having had conversations with the General Counsel for Cap Video I was disappointed by the plans but not surprised. The following subsequent dialogue I (A.C.) had with NPN explains why.
AC:
As for the store front and signage, I’m afraid Cap Video may not see any point in trying to improve upon their other store fronts when it appears they would never be accepted by NPN et al. no matter what they did or do, so why invest in making the effort? Your alienating attitude toward Cap Video made it abundantly clear that Cap Video would not be accepted under any circumstances. … or … Could you ever accept them and let them be, as you do others who sell sexually explicit materials? As for the inside of the store, Cap Video said they would comply with the zoning ordinance and the plan indicates that they will by condensing all of the adult material together into one compressed section…As for parking, I really don’t see how anyone at this point can say there is any reason to believe it will be more of a problem for a Cap Video store than the A to Z children’s store just down the street… And is the signage of the auto body shops, hardware and etc., stores in the surrounding neighborhood more artful than the signage Cap Video seemingly intends to use?As for noise, lighting, etc., first, while I share these concerns, I do not know if the City can legally consider these factors. Second, if not, amelioration of the potential secondary effects by examining such measures should have been the focus of the City’s efforts over this past many months, rather than attempting to zone the store out of town based upon the content of the wares sold inside.This is what I urged the City to do, but to no avail, no thanks to you NPN. So, after the courts have ruled on all this, if we end up stuck with an ugly Cap Video store at that location, the City probably has no one to blame more than you.
NPN:
While Capital Video may not have a legal obligation to have a tasteful appearance, they did promise it. They have now gone back on that promise in a big way, reinforcing our opinion that they are not to be trusted.If the people could trust adult enterprises to locate in reasonable places, not endanger public health, and respect community opinion, there wouldn't be such a need for adult-use zoning, would there? …It's true that we will always object to films … We are also critical of companies that profit from portraying …
We might not be able to achieve all our desires in a short period, so we strive to secure as much benefit for Northampton as we can at each point.For months we've been hearing a lot from you about the merits of First Amendment-safe urban planning that will meet the needs of the community. Have you come up with any specific recommendations or examples?
AC:
Examples and recommendations? I’ve made a number of suggestions and you know it, NPN. So why do you raise the question but to infer that I have not? These suggestions were made in posts I made to the talkbacknorthampton blog site. See, e.g., http://talkbacknorthampton.blogspot.com/2006/10/talkbacknorthampton-presents-real.html, and http://talkbacknorthampton.blogspot.com/2006/10/real-evil.html.
First, you maintain the intellectually dishonest position of claiming you support free speech while being entirely intolerant of the private communication of speech you find offensive; second, you made unfounded accusations that Andrew Shelffo had been secretly compensated by Cap Video to switch his position; and now, third, you accuse me of never making any alternative suggestions to the zoning ordinance? How deceptively disrespectfully low will you, NPN, go? …
Reasonable places? Yes, as far as I am concerned every neighborhood needs an adult establishment or two. In my opinion, sexual appetite and gratification should be understood as just another facet of normal and healthy living according to how we are made, and your ever increasing prudish attitude towards it is more unhealthy and unsafe for a community on balance than the proposed Cap Video store. The spirit of puritan Salem lives on …
Cap Video promises? To be sure I heard them, too. But you didn’t rest with passage of the ordinances you championed to drive them out of town. NPN et al. made it clear that NPN et al. will never tolerate them regardless of what they do. So why should they try to upscale and be more sensitive to the community’s sensitivities?
Yours/AC
TalkBackNorthampton
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
For unknown reasons, Peter has edited out important elements of our comments. Here is our full comment from
http://nopornnorthampton.org/2006/12/11/capital-video-plays-hardball-proposes-bondage-display-for-store-attorney-disses-community-oppostion-ahead-of-december-14-public-hearing.aspx#comment-197545
While Capital Video may not have a legal obligation to have a tasteful appearance, they did promise it. They have now gone back on that promise in a big way, reinforcing our opinion that they are not to be trusted.
If the people could trust adult enterprises to locate in reasonable places, not endanger public health, and respect community opinion, there wouldn't be such a need for adult-use zoning, would there?
It's true that we will always object to films that expose the performers to disease and other harms. We are also critical of companies that profit from portraying nonconsensual sex, and make a habit of selling films about infidelity, abusive practices and unsafe sex, when this material lacks meaningful political, artistic, scientific or cultural value.
We might not be able to achieve all our desires in a short period, so we strive to secure as much benefit for Northampton as we can at each point.
For months we've been hearing a lot from you about the merits of First Amendment-safe urban planning that will meet the needs of the community. Have you come up with any specific recommendations or examples?
___________
We then discussed Peter's proposals at
http://nopornnorthampton.org/2006/12/11/capital-video-plays-hardball-proposes-bondage-display-for-store-attorney-disses-community-oppostion-ahead-of-december-14-public-hearing.aspx#comment-198053
OK. Here's what I see at TBN at the links you mentioned...
Face the Community. The owners of Oh My...and Pride and Joy are among us, so they must face and discuss with us the concerns community members may have. Why not require something similar for absentee owners and operators? See my letter to the de facto owner of the Amazing video porn store chain posted below.
Presence. Perhaps require the de facto owners and operators of adult entertainment establishments be either community members, or actually work at their establishments on a full time basis?
Esthetic Measures. The City Council is considering amendments to ban sexually explicit content from storefronts, but that alone does not guarantee esthetically pleasing storefronts. Indeed, the Amazing video store front in Springfield was nothing but a tawdry sign and ugly cinder block. Why not look into measures that could be implemented to require or encourage esthetically pleasing storefronts?
Care for Surrounding Areas. What about requiring appropriate outdoor lighting? Care and maintenance of the grounds surrounding the premises? Funding for extra police officers to patrol the premises and surrounding areas, if the establishment stays open during late night hours?
Licensing. Perhaps there could be implemented a licensing scheme where an adult entertainment establishment would lose its license to operate if there are repeated violations of the standards we require it to abide by? I note to my chagrin how Northampton bar owners, managers and staff throw out their customers as 2 am approaches with remarkable energy and vigor...
Some of these ideas are indeed interesting and might well be beneficial if implemented in some cases. For all its potential merit, however, requiring certain businessowners to be local residents or at least work locally seems to me to be a radical concept. This could face the same First Amendment challenges as adult-use zoning does, plus other potential legal challenges, since they impose restraints and burdens on trade.
If you want Northampton city officials to consider acting on your proposals, you need to flesh them out, make them much more specific, cite examples where they are in operation (to the extent possible), and demonstrate how they could survive legal challenges. And, yes, you will have to do this fairly quickly, as Capital Video has given no indication that they want to give the people plenty of time to work out the issues.
All businesses should be sensitive to the community at all times. You seem to be condoning Capital Video's deliberate insensitivity. That doesn't sound like mature behavior on Capital Video's part or yours.
Like you, we are conducting our activism in our spare time. Far from receiving a salary, we have spent thousands of dollars of our personal funds on this project (only a small fraction of which has gone to getting advice from outside counsel).
If you want to call your two posts from October "alternative suggestions to the zoning ordinance", well then I concede the point. For the reasons stated above, however, they are far from an actionable plan that Northampton can implement to meet the present needs of the community.
You're welcome to continue developing your alternate plans, however. If there's merit in them, we'd be happy to consider them at any time, and we'd encourage the planning department to consider them, too. You'll need to flesh them out and back them with evidence at least to the extent that we do at NoPornNorthampton, and probably more, since your proposals are far less supported by precedent.
NPN forgot to mention the suggestions that Cap Video be induced to invest in the neighborhood so it had a vested interest in its condition -- which could really be a win, win situation. And, sorry, but its entirely unrealistic to expect me to compete with two people living together and obviously devoted full time to crusading against Cap Video.
While you may not be receiving a salary the anti-Cap Video cabal that you have created has had the full-time assistance of the City’s staff and its resources, which are ample in view of the $2.3 million surplus it is running. I think if I had had the same advantages, and a full time highly educated committed partner, commencing over three months prior to when I became involved in this debate, the suggestions I have made would have been more detailed.
I do not mean to condone Cap Video’s plans for the storefront and signage, but to explain probably why they have not made more of an effort to be more sensitive. Some people have speculated to me that you have antagonized Cap Video so much that Cap Video wants to get back at you and your cabal by not trying to be more sensitive. So far as I know, it appears to be the fact that because the NPN cabal, and apparently, City Hall, will never tolerate them regardless of what efforts they put into being more sensitive to the community, they really have no incentive to do more than is legally required.
NPN forgot to mention the suggestions that Cap Video be induced to invest in the neighborhood so it had a vested interest in its condition -- which could really be a win, win situation. And, sorry, but its entirely unrealistic to expect me to compete with two people living together and obviously devoted full time to crusading against Cap Video.
While you may not be receiving a salary the anti-Cap Video cabal that you have created has had the full-time assistance of the City’s staff and its resources, which are ample in view of the $2.3 million surplus it is running. I think if I had had the same advantages, and a full time highly educated committed partner, commencing over three months prior to when I became involved in this debate, the suggestions I have made would have been more detailed.
I do not mean to condone Cap Video’s plans for the storefront and signage, but to explain probably why they have not made more of an effort to be more sensitive. Some people have speculated to me that you have antagonized Cap Video so much that Cap Video wants to get back at you and your cabal by not trying to be more sensitive. So far as I know, it appears to be the fact that because the NPN cabal, and apparently, City Hall, will never tolerate them regardless of what efforts they put into being more sensitive to the community, they really have no incentive to do more than is legally required.
Post a Comment