171 replies to this topic

[ducky]

It won't be hard to know when the next election takes place. The council members wannabes backed by the developers always have the fanciest, biggest signs that will pop up all over town. I know I'll get slammed for making that comment but I can't help being a smart arse sometimes.

[Terry]

Many thanks Ducky - that really cleared things up for me and I completely understand now - thanks again

Do you know when the elections take place? I'll have to find out how folks get nominated or do people just run?

I'll have to find out when these elections take place, I've been here two years and haven't ever heard of any

Elections take place every other November which means you probably just missed the last election if you've been here two years now. Prospective candidates take out "papers" from the City Clerk's office in August preceding the November election. They have to get a number of nomination signatures on their papers from Folsom registered voters, then file those signatures with their papers to be in the running. Then the campaigning starts. Those elected take their oaths and are sworn in during the following January's meeting. Not all 5 council seats are up for election at the same time. There are 2 seats during one election year and 3 seats in the next election year (unless of course someone vacates a seat during his/her term).

Planning, Parks and Rec, Historic, Architectural Review, Arts Commissions members are nominated by council members and then voted on by the full council.

[Al Waysrite]

I still can't believe the comments made by (supposedly) intelligent members of this community.
Here's the bottom line. We have a process for making laws. Everyone in the jurisdiction must obey them or challenge them in court. That is what was done and the court upheld the law.
Refusing to obey the law or the court's decision means you hold yourself up above everyone else(by the way bish try using that argument next time you're before a judge, see how far it gets you). Trying to justify illegal behavior because others break other laws or similiar acts are considered legal are irrelevant points. EVERYONE MUST OBEY THE LAW OR FACE THE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.

[Dave Burrell]

It won't be hard to know when the next election takes place. The council members wannabes backed by the developers always have the fanciest, biggest signs that will pop up all over town. I know I'll get slammed for making that comment but I can't help being a smart arse sometimes.

how could you get slammed for that? its really just the honest truth that money rules everything everywhere and yup, I figured developers would push to get their candidates in office to help swing deals their way - I've heard of a lot of that going on around here... thats why I keep thinking that developers "own" the city council and why I feel Ms Teaz got screwed (no pun intended) - its because some developer wants that place why else would the city send a letter to them representing private investers (aka developers)

I still can't believe the comments made by (supposedly) intelligent members of this community.
Here's the bottom line. We have a process for making laws. Everyone in the jurisdiction must obey them or challenge them in court. That is what was done and the court upheld the law.
Refusing to obey the law or the court's decision means you hold yourself up above everyone else(by the way bish try using that argument next time you're before a judge, see how far it gets you). Trying to justify illegal behavior because others break other laws or similiar acts are considered legal are irrelevant points. EVERYONE MUST OBEY THE LAW OR FACE THE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.

I can't argue with you here Al...you're right on this one

curious.... are you a lawyer?

Elections take place every other November which means you probably just missed the last election if you've been here two years now. Prospective candidates take out "papers" from the City Clerk's office in August preceding the November election. They have to get a number of nomination signatures on their papers from Folsom registered voters, then file those signatures with their papers to be in the running. Then the campaigning starts. Those elected take their oaths and are sworn in during the following January's meeting. Not all 5 council seats are up for election at the same time. There are 2 seats during one election year and 3 seats in the next election year (unless of course someone vacates a seat during his/her term).

Planning, Parks and Rec, Historic, Architectural Review, Arts Commissions members are nominated by council members and then voted on by the full council.

Fantastic info - thanks Terry!

by the way be sure to vote DavBurr in the next election!

[Al Waysrite]

I can't argue with you here Al...you're right on this one

curious.... are you a lawyer?

not any more, got sick of it.

[Dave Burrell]

not any more, got sick of it.

don't blame ya

[bishmasterb]

EVERYONE MUST OBEY THE LAW OR FACE THE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.

I've said this all along. If you don't obey the law, you will face consequences. That is one main reason people obey the law, because if they don't men with guns show up and take you away.

The consequences are what causes me to pay my taxes. I do not pay my taxes out of some obligation to "obey the law."

[Steve Heard]

I don't think the developers, merchants, or our elected officials had evil intentions. I know some of those people, and they seem like good folks.

As I said, it was all based on unfounded fears of the deterioration of Sutter Street.

The fears were unfounded, as has been proven by the fact that over a year later, Sutter Street merchants are more prosperous than they previously were, with more visitors, more development coming in, etc.

I don't know how much of this can be attributed to Ms. Teaz, but one thing's for sure, they didn't hurt Sutter Street.

Ms. Teaz did not cause the moral decay of our society.

I've mentioned this before, but I helped organize the Folsom Healthy Families Forums, a campaign to make parents aware of the prevalence, dangers, prevention, detection and treatment options regarding our children and the enourmous drug problem we have in town.

This particular Forum fell on the same night as the City Council was considering the outcry over the opening of Ms. Teaz.

While Council Chambers were packed, we were next door, hoping for, but not getting a good turnout. Clearly the uptight, I mean upright citizen's brigade was more concerned with vibrators than with thei kids overdosing on drugs.

Folsom PD Chief Sam Speigel made the opening remarks at the Forum, and he commented on that fact, saying something like 'those people should be in here instead of protesting a lingerie shop'

Look at the big picture, folks. While we're spending time and money to regulate an underwear store, kids are taking ecstasy, cocaine, meth, 2ci, 2ce, marijuana, booze and cigarettes, with nobody watching, or caring.

Talk about red herrings.

[forumreader]

I've mentioned this before, but I helped organize the Folsom Healthy Families Forums, a campaign to make parents aware of the prevalence, dangers, prevention, detection and treatment options regarding our children and the enourmous drug problem we have in town.

This particular Forum fell on the same night as the City Council was considering the outcry over the opening of Ms. Teaz.

While Council Chambers were packed, we were next door, hoping for, but not getting a good turnout. Clearly the uptight, I mean upright citizen's brigade was more concerned with vibrators than with thei kids overdosing on drugs.

Folsom PD Chief Sam Speigel made the opening remarks at the Forum, and he commented on that fact, saying something like 'those people should be in here instead of protesting a lingerie shop'

Look at the big picture, folks. While we're spending time and money to regulate an underwear store, kids are taking ecstasy, cocaine, meth, 2ci, 2ce, marijuana, booze and cigarettes, with nobody watching, or caring.

Good point, Steve. As uptight (or did you mean upright?) as I might be, I was at the Healthy Families Forum that night. Like you, I was disappointed that so few members of our community were in attendance. We should be far more concerned about the dangers that drugs, alcohol and nicotine pose to our youth.

However, one shouldn't argue that because "A" is important, or even very important, that "B" is not at all important.

It also bears mentioning that it is possible, and maybe probable, that the people who REALLY needed to be at the Healthy Families Forum attended neither the HFF nor the City Council Mtg.

But back to underwear....What gets me really uptight is not so much the existence of the shop on Sutter St., but the owners' litigious actions and blatant disregard for the law. Ms. Teaz was not forced to open the shop in Folsom. Did they not look into city ordinances before signing a lease? Who has really wasted money and time here? According to the Bee article, Ms. Teaz spent $75,000 and the City spent $80,000......$155,000 could go a LONG way to help further a cause MORE IMPORTANT than underwear.

[Steve Heard]

But back to underwear....What gets me really uptight is not so much the existence of the shop on Sutter St., but the owners' litigious actions and blatant disregard for the law. Ms. Teaz was not forced to open the shop in Folsom. Did they not look into city ordinances before signing a lease? Who has really wasted money and time here? According to the Bee article, Ms. Teaz spent $75,000 and the City spent $80,000......$155,000 could go a LONG way to help further a cause MORE IMPORTANT than underwear.

Forumreader

You certainly have shown your support for more important community causes, and I wish there were more people like you out there.

No, Ms. Teaz didn't have to open on Sutter, but it was and is the best location in Folsom for such a store. There arguement wasn't against existing laws, their arguments were against the change in law and the emergency ordinance passed when they decided to open.

The judge says it was done lawfully, so they have to live with it, but they weren't suing to overturn old laws, they were fighting ones enacted, in their opinion, to stifle their business.

[randb]

The question is whether or not one believes that the sale of adult products, out of a secured back room, away from children, for the private use of couples to enhance their relationships is immoral.

Nope.

1) Is it permissable to break this city ordinance? This speaks to the bigger question: When is civil disobedience morally permissable?

No

2) Should the current city ordinance regarding "adult products" remain the same, or be changed?

Changed.

She likes these "adult products" and she wants to make $$ selling them.

What is wrong with that?

[forumreader]

What is wrong with that?

Please re-read my post. I didn't make a judgement about whether it was right or wrong. I said that Ms. Teaz likes adult products and wants to make a profit selling them. It is a business, nothing more.

I wrote this in response to those who were trying to make the weak point that Ms. Teaz's business has a greater redeeming social purpose (helping married couples enhance their relationship)....Bologna!....Are we supposed to believe that adult toys are so important to adult relationships, that without them, marriages will fail or families will be destroyed? Are we supposed to believe that the "need" for these products is so great or so essential, so as to justify civil disobedience?........Of course not!

[randb]

Please re-read my post. I didn't make a judgement about whether it was right or wrong. I said that Ms. Teaz likes adult products and wants to make a profit selling them. It is a business, nothing more.

I wrote this in response to those who were trying to make the weak point that Ms. Teaz's business has a greater redeeming social purpose (helping married couples enhance their relationship)....Bologna!....Are we supposed to believe that adult toys are so important to adult relationships, that without them, marriages will fail or families will be destroyed? Are we supposed to believe that the "need" for these products is so great or so essential, so as to justify civil disobedience?........Of course not!

Oh, okay then we agree.

[Dave Burrell]

I wrote this in response to those who were trying to make the weak point that Ms. Teaz's business has a greater redeeming social purpose (helping married couples enhance their relationship)....Bologna!....Are we supposed to believe that adult toys are so important to adult relationships, that without them, marriages will fail or families will be destroyed? Are we supposed to believe that the "need" for these products is so great or so essential, so as to justify civil disobedience?........Of course not!

I never considered Ms Teaz as having a great redeeming social purpose....thats not what that place is about nor for, they are not responsible for everyones well being - of course keep in mind neither are the majority of the business' in town - such as the many many bars that are located right next door and all up and down Sutter street. IMO those bars are far far worse then Ms Teaz but nobody gives them any grief. Does that mean booze and getting drunk and potentially endangering lives is a-ok but God forbid we have a lingerie store because its a detriment to society?

What business' in this town have a socially redeeming purpose?....what type of place would you consider that to be?...(besides a church)

Nope, lingerie and toys are not imparative for the success of a relationship, but for those couples that enjoy love and sex, they sell items that enhance that aspect of their private lives and like it or not, some people still enjoy that... a lot.

The items sold there don't guarantee a marriage won't fail, thats entirely dependant on the individuals, not their lingerie collection

Either way I hope Ms Teaz stays around - they enhance Sutter street a heckuva lot more then those many boring antique and artsy fartsy stores...and of course the many bars - but as I've said before - Sutter Street is for adults - not children, as evidenced by the anti-kids signs some of the stores there.

[rlsliger]

I wrote this in response to those who were trying to make the weak point that Ms. Teaz's business has a greater redeeming social purpose (helping married couples enhance their relationship)....Bologna!....Are we supposed to believe that adult toys are so important to adult relationships, that without them, marriages will fail or families will be destroyed? Are we supposed to believe that the "need" for these products is so great or so essential, so as to justify civil disobedience?........Of course not!

How do you know what does and doesn't enhance other peoples relationships?