188 replies to this topic

[tessieca]

I do hope you're not speaking of the handful of people (i.e. Joe G., Jerry B., Robert H., etc )

Since you mention the city council meetings, I assume you were there and saw the room full of people who supported the council's decision. I assume you heard the numerous speakers in favor of it, while the "handful" of people were the Ms. Teaz owners and their attorney, who lives in another town.

When you applaud the suit and say "we" are certain they'll win, I can only assume that you are an owner or family member. Win or lose with the lawsuit, and Ms. Teaz wins. They have become expert at keeping their name in the news. It is unfortunate that our legal system allows for losers to be winners via publicity and/or nuisance.

[camay2327]

Tessieca

You are right. There were a lot of people at the city council meetings and the majority of them were against Ms. Teaz.

I remember it well. Their attorney made a fool of himself, I thought, when he said what he would do to the city. I also remember Starsky telling him to bring it on.

I personally hope they lose their lawsuit.

[YabYum]

[self-righteous, my morals kicked your moral's arse sarcasm]



[/sarcasm]

[Dave Burrell]

Since you mention the city council meetings, I assume you were there and saw the room full of people who supported the council's decision.  I assume you heard the numerous speakers in favor of it, while the "handful" of people were the Ms. Teaz owners and their attorney, who lives in another town.

When you applaud the suit and say "we" are certain they'll win, I can only assume that you are an owner or family member.  Win or lose with the lawsuit, and Ms. Teaz wins.  They have become expert at keeping their name in the news.  It is unfortunate that our legal system allows for losers to be winners via publicity and/or nuisance.

I wish I could have attended and shown my support - but since I'm fairly new to the city, I only just found out about the schedules of these meetings (thanks to a post by mylo yesterday). I'm going to step out on a limb here and make the assumption that there were likely not very many supporters in attendance due to the lack of knowledge of the meeting taking place.

No, I am not an owner nor family member of the Ms Teaz shop, however I have been by there several times to buy a few items for my wife, and I took the time to talk with the owners about their business and how its going, and I've also taken the time to speak with several of the local business workers and patrons and polled them on their thoughts of the place - every single person I talked to about it was supportive - and I'm not talking about a handful of people here I'm talking about at least 30 or 40 people - all of them had nothing but positive things to say about the Ms Teaz business.

In reality there is really nothing to win in this lawsuit, there is no money involved other then the outlay of funds that the owners are spending out of their own pockets to support their belief in their rights to maintain this business.

The only thing to be lost here is our freedom - our right to love our spouses and show it - this shop is not evil - its a great way actually to bring couples together, like it or not - sexuality exists for those of us who still have a labido.

As far as the publicity goes that is the nature of the beast in this great world of newspapers, tabloids and tv.

I don't want to come off as an arse to you, and I'm sorry if I do - I am just speaking my mind and I truely believe in what they are doing at Ms Teaz.
I think their shop has been setup in a reputable manner and I think they are providing a very good business to help couples enhance their relationships.

[Steve Heard]

Since you mention the city council meetings, I assume you were there and saw the room full of people who supported the council's decision.  I assume you heard the numerous speakers in favor of it, while the "handful" of people were the Ms. Teaz owners and their attorney, who lives in another town.

The opponents were indeed, well organized. There was a church group, I believe, from Sacramento who declared the lingerie store a 'porno shop' and urged citizens to fight the destruction of our fabled old town, 'lined with doll houses and ice cream shoppes'. There were claims that child porn would be sold, that perverts would be coming in from all over the Sacramento area to hang out there. Our kids wouldn't be safe on Sutter Street anymore. That certainly brought out the protesters. The City Council office was packed. Turns out it wasn't true.

Alas, not many come out in support of a lingerie shop that sells adult items in the back. The owners were left twisting in the wind.

I was next door that night, at the community center, helping to produce the Folsom Healthy Families Forum. We had a small and disappointing turnout for a well publicized, informative and eye-opening program, attempting to bring to light the real threat against our kids; rampant drug and alcohol abuse in this town.

Police Chief Speigel made opening remarks for the program. He commented on the large crowd at the council meeting, and how those parents really should have been at our forum, instead.

I don't know if many would show up in support of a lingerie shop today. It doesn't seem to be a high priority for anyone but the owners.

I do hope the Dufours and the City can come to an amicable resolution. Folsom is a great town, and the Dufours are law-abiding citizens, trying to make a living.

"Can't we all just, get along?" - Words spoken by the great peace maker, Rodney King

[tessieca]

Had you been there, Steve, you would have heard their assurances that they did not want to put sexually suggestive items in the window and were quite content to leave the adult toys to the infamous back room. This turn of events is simply another ploy to create attention to their store.

Davburr: I was responding to dmarkum, not to you. Rest assured that there was a large room full of people and nearly all of the speakers and audience supported what the city did. The city has regular meetings and makes the agenda public, so you can't blame it on the city or council if you miss an issue. In fact, in this case, the owners created a huge amount of publicity over the issue, so that anyone in town who watched TV, read a local paper or Sac. Bee, or paid attention to city issues would have known it was happening.

[Dkmarkum]

Since you mention the city council meetings, I assume you were there and saw the room full of people who supported the council's decision.  I assume you heard the numerous speakers in favor of it, while the "handful" of people were the Ms. Teaz owners and their attorney, who lives in another town.

When you applaud the suit and say "we" are certain they'll win, I can only assume that you are an owner or family member.  Win or lose with the lawsuit, and Ms. Teaz wins.  They have become expert at keeping their name in the news.  It is unfortunate that our legal system allows for losers to be winners via publicity and/or nuisance.

Nope; Madam you are incorrect. However, I do know there were several people at the city meeting much like Jim Snook who were feed the wrong info to create panic (interested people who thought that a BAD store was coming to their neighborhood). There were some such as you who had nothing more to do then create problems for others, and they were there in force. This is not the majority. Draw a parallel with the voting public... Do you honestly believe that the majority makes the laws? No - it is those in power. Representatives can vote how ever they choose once in office (much the same as the city council who all have businesses at the end of the day which do prosper from their decisions). The owners are good people who deserved to go into their business without any fuss (and the HUGE added expense of attorneys which the city forced them to seek out). The city did rob them of this right. You did help to put them into the news as did your acquiantances. Let's reveal our partnerships - and do away with the masks. I'm game if you are. By they way, the Dufours had a private investigator on the case since the day their attorney was accused of "being pompus" for stating the fact that they were doing business long before the "emergency ordinance" was passed; hence, one BIG item the city hopes to brush under the rug.

[tessieca]

The majority who voiced their opinion (that you now admit) certainly can be thought to represent the majority of the public -- far more than can the vocal few who spoke in favor of the store.

The rest of the comments are just odd! Unmask ye or be damned! The magnificent private investigator knows the true story of the opening of the grand store, and the opposition will soon sense the impending doom. Lo, their fate is at hand!

[Dave Burrell]

The majority who voiced their opinion (that you now admit) certainly can be thought to represent the majority of the public -- far more than can the vocal few who spoke in favor of the store.

The rest of the comments are just odd!  Unmask ye or be damned!  The magnificent private investigator knows the true story of the opening of the grand store, and the opposition will soon sense the impending doom.  Lo, their fate is at hand!

I'm really having a hard time understanding your opposition to the store - why is it you feel so strongly against their business?

[TLC]

I'm really having a hard time understanding your opposition to the store - why is it you feel so strongly against their business?

I agree. You are so heck bent on slandering this store that you appear to be one of the bad guys/girls. One would have to question your affiliantion here. Every statement you've made is very angry. What do you have to gain in bad mouthing this business? Obviously, they are a family who have taken great risks to open a store, and were met with some powerful opposition from the same mindset as yours. Our wise predecessors teach that we should put ourselves in others places and ask "what if this were us?" So what if you had tried opening a conservative store matching your conservative nature imposing your beliefs on others? Would you be satisified if you were robbed of your rights and were forced to pay very large amounts of monies to open your business. Didn't your parents at least teach you this much or are you one found at uprisings against equal rights? Have you ever looked into the costs of attorneys and investigators? Not cheap. Little return in publicity for all the costs and time expended.

[OctoberLily]

I'm also curious as to the reasons why the Folsom Chamber of Commerce denied their membership. What "legal" reason did they provide or can they arbitrarily choose who can and cannot be a member for any reason whatsoever.

I am also curious why some members of this forum are so against Ms. Teaz. Do you guys have anything to gain by demonizing the owners and the business?

I would rather have Ms. Teaz in town then the new brewery that opened up on E. Bidwell. There are more stupid drunks on the road now and no one in the community spoke out against them. I'm always cautioning my kids about driving around that area - especially at night. Gee, what is worse - lingerie and sex toys or drunk drivers ready to wipe your families off the face of the earth? Let's think about that.

I, too, find it hypocritical that all of those people attended the City Council Meeting to speak out against Ms. Teaz and only a handful went to the Healthy Families Forum next door. I guess drugs and alcohol and our kids are not as important as bashing a business and people trying to make a living. Heaven forbid our kids turn into monsters because Ms. Teaz is in town. Kids are exposed to more filfth on t.v. then Ms. Teaz on Sutter. How many of the people that attended the City Council Meeting write to the FCC complaining about the crap they show on t.v.?

Give me a break.

As far as I'm concerned I hope Ms. Teaz wins their lawsuit and they blow the lid off and expose the flagrant abuse of power that certain city officials have imposed against them. This is about exercising their rights and good for them for fighting for it. Face it, how many people/businesses have been discriminated against and have cowered and wilted away letting the people in power abuse them with disregard to their rights? Anyone know of any other businesses who were unjustly turned away by the Folsom Chamber of Commerce or arbitrarily restricted by the City? Are there others out there afraid to speak up?

[Dave Burrell]

I agree.  You are so heck bent on slandering this store that you appear to be one of the bad guys/girls.  One would have to question your affiliantion here.  Every statement you've made is very angry.  What do you have to gain in bad mouthing this business?  Obviously, they are a family who have taken great risks to open a store, and were met with some powerful opposition from the same mindset as yours.  Our wise predecessors teach that we should put ourselves in others places and ask "what if this were us?"  So what if you had tried opening a conservative store matching your conservative nature imposing your beliefs on others?  Would you be satisified if you were robbed of your rights and were forced to pay very large amounts of monies to open your business.  Didn't your parents at least teach you this much or are you one found at uprisings against equal rights? Have you ever looked into the costs of attorneys and investigators?  Not cheap.  Little return in publicity for all the costs and time expended.

Hi,
I'm assuming you really intended this post for tessieca who wrote the original note that I had replied to - because I am in full support of Ms Teaz.
By the way - very good post - thank you!
Dave

[Dave Burrell]

I'm also curious as to the reasons why the Folsom Chamber of Commerce denied their membership.  What "legal" reason did they provide or can they arbitrarily choose who can and cannot be a member for any reason whatsoever.

I am also curious why some members of this forum are so against Ms. Teaz.  Do you guys have anything to gain by demonizing the owners and the business?

I would rather have Ms. Teaz in town then the new brewery that opened up on E. Bidwell.  There are more stupid drunks on the road now and no one in the community spoke out against them.  I'm always cautioning my kids about driving around that area - especially at night.  Gee, what is worse - lingerie and sex toys or drunk drivers ready to wipe your families off the face of the earth?  Let's think about that.

I, too, find it hypocritical that all of those people attended the City Council Meeting to speak out against Ms. Teaz and only a handful went to the Healthy Families Forum next door.  I guess drugs and alcohol and our kids are not as important as bashing a business and people trying to make a living.  Heaven forbid our kids turn into monsters because Ms. Teaz is in town.  Kids are exposed to more filfth on t.v. then Ms. Teaz on Sutter.  How many of the people that attended the City Council Meeting write to the FCC complaining about the crap they show on t.v.?

Give me a break.

As far as I'm concerned I hope Ms. Teaz wins their lawsuit and they blow the lid off and expose the flagrant abuse of power that certain city officials have imposed against them.  This is about exercising their rights and good for them for fighting for it.  Face it, how many people/businesses have been discriminated against and have cowered and wilted away letting the people in power abuse them with disregard to their rights?  Anyone know of any other businesses who were unjustly turned away by the Folsom Chamber of Commerce or arbitrarily restricted by the City?  Are there others out there afraid to speak up?

Outstanding post - kudos! You made a very valid point there - for those conservatives here who are supposedly very concerned about the well being of the city - they lost serious focus by damning Ms Teaz and skipping out on the Family meeting about the drugs/alcohol and kids - my assumption here is that they are more concerned about their own religious agendas then the well being of our children- pretty sad isn't it?

Once again - very good post - thank you for being a member of society who truely understands the real priorities this city should be focusing on - our kids well being, not adults buying lingerie..

[cybertrano]

Same here.

But hey, if they win I will be able to see XXX hardcore stuffs right here in Folsom. I don't have to go to Rancho any more. How convenient.

This whole thing is such a joke.

Tessieca

..............................

I personally hope they lose their lawsuit.

[DrKoz23]

I was next door that night, at the community center, helping to produce the Folsom Healthy Families Forum. We had a small and disappointing turnout for a well publicized, informative and eye-opening program, attempting to bring to light the real threat against our kids; rampant drug and alcohol abuse in this town.

If I was a parent... I would be a little more concerned about my kid using drugs or abusing alcohol rather than worry about a lingerie shop that in my opinion doesn't detract one bit from the historic feel of Sutter St. Maybe I can hope that they (the protesting parents) all got lost on the way to the community center and ended up in the council meeting instead.

What do these opponents think... that we live in a Puritan world where nobody ever thinks of sex. Get over it people. You are the same people who think the government should regulate everything we watch on TV or hear on the radio! If you don't like it (the store)... then don't go in! From the outside walking along the sidewalk the store looks rather tastefully put together. I don't think you'll have to explain to Little Johnny what Ms Teaz is... but you might want to think talking to them about drugs and alcohol... because that is the REAL threat!