171 replies to this topic

[Al Waysrite]

the responses of dave, farley and bish are unbelievable. this was a case alleged as a violation of the first amendment. the judge saw past that and ruled for the city. now we have members of the community saying ignore the judge's ruling and continue to violate the ordinance merely because they don't like it. well guess what you three, you don't always get your way, sometimes the community as a whole comes first. that is what the city council's decision was based on and the judge ruled correctly that they may do so.

[Chad Vander Veen]

and in addition whether it is just or not........the law is not always right, fair, just, and that is why it is questioned. If a law is assinine, it begs to not be obeyed.

Farley, that's a terrible argument. There are legal ways to get a law changed. Disobeying it because you don't like it is foolishness. If, as you claim, the majority of Folsom residents agree with Ms. Teaz, then YOU should take the lead in getting a citywide initiative started to elminate the exiting ordinance.

[Dave Burrell]

YOU should take the lead in getting a citywide initiative started to elminate the exiting ordinance.

do you think thats possible? I don't get the impression the city council would be willing to listen to any arguments for Ms Teaz let alone consider an initiative to eliminate the ordinance....I don't believe its possible....course I could be wrong - it certainly won't be the first time..

the responses of dave, farley and bish are unbelievable. this was a case alleged as a violation of the first amendment. the judge saw past that and ruled for the city. now we have members of the community saying ignore the judge's ruling and continue to violate the ordinance merely because they don't like it. well guess what you three, you don't always get your way, sometimes the community as a whole comes first. that is what the city council's decision was based on and the judge ruled correctly that they may do so.

Its unbelievable to you Al because we are completely opposite in the way we think and much to your chagrin, we don't believe you are always right - only you do (sorry to be the bearer of bad news)

you're right tho - we dont' always get our way but we are certainly free to speak up and voice our opinions on it - not that thats going to change anything

you're right as well, it was the conservative councils decision to flip flop and change the codes to cator to their personal beliefs as well as it was for the judge - they win - the people of the city lose

By the way - you guys are all up in arms over this rebellion by Ms Teaz not to follow the ordinance - you speak as if you obey every law in existence - let me ask you this simple question - when was the last time you drove 45 miles an hour all thru town as its posted and as its the law?

[Farley]

Farley, that's a terrible argument. There are legal ways to get a law changed. Disobeying it because you don't like it is foolishness. If, as you claim, the majority of Folsom residents agree with Ms. Teaz, then YOU should take the lead in getting a citywide initiative started to elminate the exiting ordinance.

I know it is a typo but I can't help smile at your wording, eliminate the exiting ordinance....

[Dave Burrell]

I know it is a typo but I can't help smile at your wording, eliminate the exiting ordinance....

we WISH it was an "exiting" ordinance

[cw68]

Long live "uptight, prissy attitudes!"

Then how about targeting businesses that crumble our family units, create disorder, contribute to domestic violence, severe health problems, destitution and crime? That doesn't describe an "adult" store. That's alcohol. Bars. Taverns. The legal drug we allow, take and promote.

How many people and/or families do you know that have been detrimentally effected by racy items? Compare that to the cost of excessive drinking and alcoholism. I've been hurt by the second thing, never the first.

[forumreader]

Sure. If I were dictator for the day, I would go after them also!

[cw68]

Sure. If I were dictator for the day, I would go after them also!

Then why don't you use your energy to make a real change on Sutter instead of using Teaz and a scapegoat?

[Chad Vander Veen]

Then why don't you use your energy to make a real change on Sutter instead of using Teaz and a scapegoat?

Why don't you take your energy to change the law if it's so important to you?

[forumreader]

cw68:
We are SIMPLY having a discussion, as we all do on this forum! I've not used Ms. Teaz as a scapegoat, nor have I asked City Council to close her down. -- It is not THAT important to me.

My energies in the political arena are focused on a much bigger life issue which I won't discuss on this forum. On the local level, I'm focusing on traffic safety, which is more important than sleazy stuff on Sutter St.

[cw68]

Why don't you take your energy to change the law if it's so important to you?

It's not important to me. I was trying to point out that the adult store doesn't really damage us. Alcohol can, and does.

cw68:
We are SIMPLY having a discussion, as we all do on this forum! I've not used Ms. Teaz as a scapegoat, nor have I asked City Council to close her down. -- It is not THAT important to me.

My energies in the political arena are focused on a much bigger life issue which I won't discuss on this forum. On the local level, I'm focusing on traffic safety, which is more important than sleazy stuff on Sutter St.

We are simply having a discussion, there was no malicious intent behind my comments. I just think people focusing on an adult store being wrong and anti-family on a street where people get schnockered all the time is hypocritical. You don't have to be a dictator do affect change.

And I wholeheartedly agree with you that traffic safety is much more important and I'm glad you're involved with it.

[bishmasterb]

So we only have to obey the ordinances that we like?

Yes, no one is under any obligation to obey the law. Did you ever give your consent to be bound by any law, that any level of government might dream up? I'm sure you didn't and neither did I.

If a law was passed prohibiting you from praying, would you stop? Of course you wouldn't!

[cw68]

Both do damage.

Fast cars and bars. Incredibly deadly in combination.

[Steve Heard]

It is what it is. The city won, and so Ms. Teaz will have to comply, move or appeal.

I don't have a problem with a city controlling what kind of businesses can operate in specific areas, but my arguements have been based on the facts that the outcry over Ms. Teaz was based on fear:

1) Fear that the 'Family Atmosphere' of Sutter would be ruined - The 'family atomosphere' some claim for Sutter Street does not exist. Snooks and the pizza parlors are the only truly family friendly establishments. The bars, art galleries and antique shops don't offer faimly friendly environments. In fact, 1 of the galleries and I believe one of the antique shops have 'watch your kids' signs posted.

2) Fear that such shops are harmful to familes and/or marriages - Actually, adult products sold by Ms. Teaz, such as lingerie, games, lotions, books, tapes and the infamous toys can actually enhance marital relationships and keep families together. I don't think too many marriages were destroyed by nylons or vibrators.

3) Fear that it would ruin the business climate of Sutter Street - Sutter is more vibrant now than it has been in years. The owner of American Visions once told me that her business increased when Ms. Teaz opened.

4) These things don't belong where kids might see them - Well they're kept in the back room, and as mentioned before, there aren't many kids on Sutter. On the other hand, there are two liquor stores a hundred yards or so from Sutter Middle School, and they display their pornography so prominently that everyone who walks in will see it. Kids DO frequent those stores to buy their sodas, chips and candy. Those stores have operated there for years, exposing kids to x-rated material, and no one complains.

5) Fear that it would bring the 'wrong element' to Sutter - As usual, fights go on at the 'family friendly' bars on Sutter all the time, but none at Ms. Teaz. No perverts in raincoats, no molester, no bums taking light rail to buy porn.

Be that as it may, the city won, and Ms. Teaz will have to decide if it would be best for the business and their pocketbook to accept it, move the shop, or continue to fight.

I'd hate to see them go. I think they livened up the place. I hope they can work something out.