TalkBackNorthampton Presents: The Real Challenge

The Real Challenge
An Open Letter to the City of Northampton

The real challenge facing the City of Northampton is how to deal with the secondary effects that might flow from an Amazing porn store, and others like it, while preserving as much latitude to all forms of expression and diversity of lifestyle as possible. I submit that in our panic to banish threatening porn stores to the outskirts of town, we verge on losing exactly what makes Northampton so special: its renowned tolerance, if not celebration, of intellectual, artistic, cultural and life style diversity. In large part, that is why Northampton is a destination for many who visit us and why so many of us who live here feel truly at home.

Northampton, stand back and look at the sweep of the various amendments to the zoning laws we are considering, a perfect storm of censorship, all really because of one proposed porn shop. Let’s be honest. Even if an Amazing porn store at 135 King Street displayed less than 1,000 square feet of adult material many of us would still believe it would sit there like filthy fly, infecting the neighborhood.

How pitiful that, in our panic, we feel compelled to use a sledge hammer to swat a fly where a swatter would serve us better. After all, what will this sledge hammer accomplish? After smashing into the furniture, our sledge hammer will have only made this fly and flies like it move to different spots not so far from where we first swung.

How pitiful that we lack the imagination, with all the intellect and creativity around us, to more closely consider what exactly causes the secondary effects we fear and to devise the appropriate measures to more surgically and effectively deal with them.

Let’s take a closer look by asking if adult entertainment inherently causes the secondary effects we fear, or if there is merely a coincidence of secondary effects often, but not always, observed where adult entertainment establishments may be located. If the latter, then one may reasonably conclude that other factors may be involved, and porn and porn stores alone, are not the causes of the secondary effects.

Do undesirable secondary effects necessarily flow into a neighborhood from the purchase, sale and use of pornography, as many seem to believe? Of course not. Consider all the pornography being enjoyed in households and dorm rooms all across Northampton via cable and the internet every week. Has it increased crime in surrounding areas? Depressed the property values across the City? Created a City wide dead-zone? The belief that undesirable secondary effects necessary flow into a community from the distribution and use of pornographic material and adult entertainment alone is just silly.

Do undesirable secondary effects necessarily flow into a neighborhood from the mere presence of porn shops? Of course not. Consider the porn shops in the West Village on Sixth Avenue, West 4th Street and Christopher Street, the French Quarter in New Orleans, the Red Light district in Amsterdam or the existent porn shops in Northampton, Oh My …. and Pride and Joy. Have they ruined the cities and neighborhoods in which they are located? To the contrary, in the eyes of many, on a net basis, the adult entertainment establishments enhance their cities and neighborhoods. Not all pornographic and adult entertainment establishments foul the neighborhoods in which they are located.

Indeed we at TalkBackNorthampton are learning that the studies relied upon by Nopornnorthampton and others are fundamentally flawed, including the NYC Adult Entertainment Study touted by Nopornnorthampton. Reputable researchers who are not pawns of the adult entertainment industry find, upon close scrutiny, that these studies ultimately rely upon other studies which lack credibility. As the work involved in preparing a critique of these studies is quite substantial, our critique will be featured in separate posts at this blog site. Some preliminary critiques are provided as footnotes.

For present purposes I submit that the real problem is that undesirable secondary effects flow from adult entertainment establishments for the same reasons that undesirable secondary effects flowed from other retail establishments which historically were irresponsibly operated and insensitive to the interests of the communities in which they were located, be it laundromats, bars, tanneries or Chinese restaurants.

To be sure, porn shops do have a bad reputation, and well earned. This is not surprising when we consider how historically society has viewed pornography, adult entertainment and anyone openly involved with it. Historically, no responsible community member would openly have anything to do with it! So, to fulfill its demand for sexually explicit materials and entertainment, respectable society left the job up to the very characters that could not care less about the interests of the community and the responsible operation of their establishments.

So, what should we do? The demand for, and therefore the production and distribution of “erotica” or “pornography” will never really go away. Perhaps we should accept the facts of life and channel that energy in manner calculated to result in a town that resembles in part the West Village in NYC rather than Eight Avenue in Hell’s Kitchen? At the very least, we should search for measures to implement that would discourage owners and operators of adult entertainment establishments for insensitive and irresponsible behavior. Set forth below, I list a number of ideas to start the process of devising viable alternatives to the proposed amendments to the zoning ordinances, many of which will be easier to equitably apply in practice than the 1,000 square foot rule:

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 …

At this juncture, I really do not know if any of the above ideas will be particularly viable or legal, but there are two things I do know: First, adult entertainment establishments are not going away. Indeed, Capital Video may either reduce the size of their display of adult content to under 1,000 square feet or ultimately prevail in court. Second, when we fail to hold owners and operators of pornographic stores and adult entertainment establishments to high quality of life standards, but instead, just attempt to relocate them to already depressed parts of town, then, at best, we merely relocate the problem from one area of Northampton to another. For that we all should be ashamed.


Sincerely yours,


Always Controversial

Footnotes

The findings of the NYC Adult Entertainment Study are at odds with its conclusions (which were driven more by politics than science). The NYC study ultimately relies upon studies conducted in other cities to support its conclusions, many of which subsequently have been discredited. The only real causal link established by the NYC study was that the mere public perception of concentration of porn stores and adult entertainment establishments caused undesirable secondary effects, not necessarily the adult entertainment establishments themselves!

Here are just a few our notes which put the NYC study in a more unbiased perspective than Nopornnrothampton would have you believe:

1. The survey also interviewed community liaisons and beat officers in study areas. “When the survey and control block fronts were compared for criminal complaints and allegations, the officers generally did not link higher incidents with adult uses…. Four of the six officers thought the adult uses have no effect on crime” (50).

2. In the words of interviewed brokers: “Several brokers added comments to explain their responses about the impact of adult entertainment establishments on nearby property values. Some said that property value decreases would be minimal or that values may be affected differently depending on the age make-up of the area” (51).

3. On pages 52-54, the study attempts to analyze criminal complaints between survey areas containing adult entertainment establishments and control areas. However, the study admits “it was not possible to draw definitive conclusions from the analysis of criminal complaints. Land uses other than adult entertainment establishments, e.g., subway station access, appear to have a far stronger relationship to criminal complaints. It was not possible to isolate the impact of adult uses relative to criminal complaints” (66). (Emphasis added.)

4. On property value: “The analysis of trends in assessed valuation relative to adult entertainment uses was inconclusive” (54). Also: “While the total assessed values on the survey block fronts may be influenced to some extent by the presence of adult entertainment uses, demonstrating such effects is very difficult” (54).

5. The study also acknowledges: “In some cases, particularly in study areas with only one adult entertainment establishment, the DCP survey did not yield conclusive evidence of a direct relationship between the adult use and the urban ills affecting the community. This reflects the fact that, in a city as dense and diverse as New York, it is difficult to isolate specific impacts attributable to any particular land use. Other cities that have conducted similar studies have acknowledged the same difficulty” (62).

An Open Letter to Kenneth Guarino & Capital Video

October 4, 2006

Via Facsimile and Regular Mail

Mr. Kenneth Guarino
Captial Video Corporation
780 Reservoir Ave.
Cranston, Rhode Island 02910

Re: 135 King Street, Northampton, MA 01060

Dear Mr. Guarino:

I am a resident of the neighborhood in Northampton, Massachusetts where you intend to establish another Amazing video store. By speaking out at City Council and relevant committee meetings, and running my blog, http://www.blogger.com/, I have become what some characterize as a member of the responsible opposition to the proposed amendments to the City’s zoning ordinances to banish your store to the outskirts of town. You may believe that I write to offer my support, but I write, instead, to call you out.

My complaint is that you have done nothing to address the concerns of the community about the secondary effects that your establishments have caused elsewhere and might cause here. While I do not subscribe to the theory that secondary effects inherently flow from adult entertainment establishments, there is no doubt that secondary effects flow from owners of retail establishments who are irresponsible members of the communities in which they operate, be it owners of porn stores, bars or Chinese restaurants. The mere content sold within your establishments is not responsible for the secondary effects. You are.

It is mostly because of irresponsible operators of adult establishments who are insensitive to the communities in which they locate that porn has the near universal bad reputation that it has. Little wonder that even our liberal community accepts as gospel truth that secondary effects flow as inevitably from a porn shop as light from the sun. For that reason, few people anywhere disagree with the sentiment that hard core porn retailers like you deserve whatever treatment they get.

Perhaps you prefer it that way, basking in your defiance, or just don’t really care. But, acting as a responsible owner of an adult establishment in the community is, if nothing else, just good business. The pendulum of First Amendment protection is swinging further and further away from you, and may get stuck there far, far away for a long, long time.

The public is becoming more and more accepting everyday of censorship measures more commonly associated with China, of all places, than the USA – so do not expect the Internet to save your business empire. Have you noticed how the government lately has shut down off-shore on-line gambling operations? Curtailed on-line tobacco operations situated on Indian reservations? Purely as a business decision, it’s time to rely upon something more than the First Amendment and your lawyers.

In light of first, the prevailing public perception that plagues hard core sex establishments, and, secondly, the advantages that may flow from reliance upon more than your shrinking First Amendment rights, you may be better off requiring your stores to be community leaders in the neighborhoods where they are located.

I visited your store in Springfield this last week. It is a small, low class joint with a bland cinder block store front in a neighborhood that needs a good sweeping, wash and paint job, at the very least. There was no reason to believe your store has hastened the demise of, or improved upon, the neighborhood. But I submit that it is in your best interest to require your stores to be better than the rest of the stores in a neighborhood. For starters, why was the sidewalk in front of your store no cleaner than the sidewalk in front of the neighboring stores? Why have you not spent the pocket change to put up an attractive mural on the storefront? Etc., etc.

Here in Northampton, you can start by acting as, or even better than, any other responsible local business owner would. Any other local business operator carrying on a type of business associated with undesirable secondary effects, be it noise, drunken patrons or refuse, in this small town must face the community in person and address its concerns, be it in the coffee shops, or in formal city council or committee meetings.

Why not you? You could pro-actively appear in person, negotiate and agree to specific measures to prevent and be held accountable for the secondary effects that may flow from the irresponsible operation of an establishment such as yours, like any other local business owner.

Sure, legally, I suppose you could send representatives in your stead, or hope your lawyers prevail in court, but that will only reinforce the impression among us that you do not respect the community, and if you do not respect it, why should it respect you?

You may think you need not prove to us that you deserve respect. You have reputedly partnered with tough characters in the past. But that hardly engenders the respect you seek, and may ultimately need, from this community.

Other owners of adult enterprises, such as Hugh Hefner and Larry Flynt long ago began to step up and still step up to face the public. But so far you have proven merely that you are afraid that a small town city council and its community members can stare you down.

In short, Mr. Guarino, you have proven nothing but that you are a coward, unworthy of respect. So, take your shoddy operation and get the hell out of town, or step up, face the public and be a real man.



Very truly yours,



Peter L. Brooks

An Open Letter to Nopornnorthampton

An Open Letter To Nopornnorthampton

Dear Nopornnorthampton:

Your point of view makes many valid points. Harm results from porn just as much as harm results from the production and consumption of goods in many other industries, such as the alcoholic beverage industry.

But pornographic material does make a social statement that sex, even uncommitted and so-called deviant sex, can be and is good for us and should be enjoyed without guilt and shame by those who wish to engage in it. Disagree with this point of view as you wish, but you should not have the right to deny First Amendment protection to adult material equal to your own.

You state that you would not banish “erotica” that you define as sexually explicit material depicting romantic love between committed couples. But one person's version of acceptable erotica is another person's porn. One should be able to browse the erotic material of their choice in any form as readily as any other type of material offered in hard copy downtown, particularly because for many of us living downtown the usual mode of transportation is by foot.

While I am not interested in most of what Capital Video offers, the proposed changes to the zoning law which you support may effectively zone out of our downtown area the stores most likely to carry the material many of us consider desirable erotica. Be careful, Nopornnorthampton, lest you throw the baby (our freedom) out with the dirty bath water. Your “erotica” is next.

Make no mistake - obstructing access to pornographic material by zoning it to the outskirts of town is, as a practical matter, actual and real censorship. If the subject matter of the material of the establish was solely religious or ideological in nature no one would seriously contend that zoning it to the outskirts of town represented anything but wrongful censorship. So, stop continuing to insult us by claiming that it not censorship. It is.

Indeed, more harm has been committed against women and children, past and present, by and in the name of religion and ideology than all the porn put together ever did.

Furthermore, the revolting or degrading nature of the material does not justify its banishment. Gay erotica is degrading and revolting to many heterosexual men, but no one would dare draft an ordinance banning homosexual erotica in this town. The truth is that when people justify banishment of pornography to protect women and children, they usually are merely seeking to protect themselves from the embarrassment or shame they feel about sex.

I also wish to see the King Street area improved upon. But instead of targeting the expressive content of the wares the King Street vendors offer inside their establishments, let’s work together on zoning requirements and restrictions which may improve the area, such as signage and storefront specifications, rather than dally with governmental restrictions that raise the specter of censorship.

Yours sincerely,

A. C.