RSSA thong is wrong under amended city ordinance
Council's action prompted by mayor's concern about scantily clad women at 'sexpresso' standsYakima Herald-Republic
E-mail
Print
Comments
More 'Local'
- Valley students show an eye for art
- Nation in distress leaves lasting impact on Yakima aid workers
- 02/08/10 News quiz answers
- No drive for students to learn to drive?
- Officials seek information about horse-shooting incident near Outlook
- Heart of the matter
- A touch of tech enhances math class
YAKIMA, Wash. -- Responding to the proliferation of sexpresso coffee stands, the Yakima City Council approved minor changes to the city's indecent exposure ordinance Tuesday night.
The changes prohibit see-through apparel and G-strings in public. The revised ordinance also defines something known in legal parlance as "cleavage of the buttocks."
Revisions to the city's indecent exposure law were more limited than those sought by Mayor Dave Edler, who sought a regulatory crackdown under the city's new Adult Business ordinance.
Edler, a pastor, raised concerns last month about the number of coffee stands featuring scantily clad baristas. In less than a year, three such stands have opened for business in Yakima, including one downtown Yakima Avenue. A fourth is in Union Gap.
The council voted 5-2 to amend the indecent exposure ordinance after the city's legal staff warned that attempting to place coffee stands under the adult business ordinance would lead to a constitutional challenge. The adult business ordinance applies mainly to businesses that sell pornographic videos and sexual devices.
The amended indecent exposure ordinance clarifies what kind of clothing is allowed in public. Anyone wearing see-through apparel or a thong or G-string -- regardless of whether they are working at a coffee stand -- could be prosecuted.
A violation is a misdemeanor, subject to 90 days in jail and a $1,000 fine. If a person exposes themselves to a child under 14 years old, the violation becomes a gross misdemeanor, which is punishable by up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine.
Edler has come under some heat from citizens about his sudden interest in the clothing women are wearing at local coffee stands, with some arguing that he ought to be focusing his political energy on other local issues.
In a statement to the council, the mayor defended his opposition to such businesses, which he accused of contributing to sex crimes against women.
"If you want to create an environment where crime can happen," Edler said, "you turn a blind eye to adult businesses. And that's why this is important to me."
Council members Kathy Coffey and Rick Ensey voted against the changes, with Coffey suggesting that amending the indecent exposure code was an empty gesture.
Said Coffey to Edler, "This isn't going to achieve what you want to achieve."
* Chris Bristol can be reached at 577-7748 or at cbristol@yakimaherald.com.
(This comment has been removed by a Yakima Herald-Republic moderator)
I thought "thongs" were those sandal-things, the ones that have a thong between your toes to help keep them on. We always called them thongs for decades. I guess I'll have to give up on owning any of those - I will be afraid to go into the store now and ask, "Where are the thongs?"
Sorry, you voyeuristic coffee-freaks - you will now have to go to any public beach to get your coffee if you want to see scantily-clad girls in booty-floss bikinis.
So, does this new law mean that high school and jr. high kids can no longer wear these bathing suits into the city-owned swimming pools? Are those businesses "covered" too? (no pun intended) I see "thongs" every summer there. Of course, if I were "the dad", I wouldn't want MY daughter running around in these things ANYWHERE, not even at home. Perhaps THAT's where the "law" should start - with proper parenting.
(This comment has been removed by a Yakima Herald-Republic moderator)
Good grief would Mr. Edler give it a rest!! I cannot wait until election time to get rid of this joke of a Mayor.
There is way better issues to be dealing with other than Daves own personal agenda. Please yakima do not elect anyone to be mayor unless they are for the people of yakima and not his personal church!!!!
Yeah..Pray it away. That'll work. For those Yakimanians who do not have horse's blinders on, it's the society that prohibits that ends up being like the Taliban, and this is not over stating it, While some reasonable limits are ok, like don't walk down the street naked, exposure of the body has never, and will never, have the generalized effect that you OVER RELIGIOUS folks think it does, or will. It's this mindset that caused the terrorists to do what they did. Look at advertisements. For your 'God's' sake, just take a trip to Seattle in your life. What is Yakima, anyway, a Church? For your information, every person I've known who calls themselves Christian in my 59 years has been an arrogant attention getter who doesn't really care about helping others, unless they are SEEN to get the credit. On the other hand, I've known folks who DO good, incredible good...and they do NOT seek the glory for it...besides I thought that kind of thing was spelled out in the 'Good Book'...it's got alot of great ideas in it, the Bible, don't get me wrong...it's just that it never fails to amaze me how most of you so-called Christians seem to have never read the lessons in it, for God's sake!!! No pun intended.
Report ViolationOne more thing....Christians....did not invent NICE.
One more thing....why is it more people have died in the name of religion than any other reason.
One more thing...this is the 21st century.
So it starts with this and whats next. I believe we just opened the door to future regulations of this type.
Report ViolationFYI... One could think that. But I won't stand for it. It's just too ridiculous. I bet my Seattle Lawyer could wipe them up like tying his shoes, even if it took going to the Supreme Court.
Report Violationthese self-named Christians see evil everywhere, so much so that they will fail to see it when they should see it most importantly, in themselves,, in how their own actions hurt others... especially just after-the-fact, when their PRIDE, another thing they seem not to be aware of--that's in their 'book' too--prohibits them from doing the right thing. But these folks are long past that juncture. FYI, I think you and I both know it'd be a rare one that has the inner wisdom to admit that and join the human race again, where the rest of us live.
Report Violation"a thong or G-string -- regardless of whether they are working at a coffee stand -- could be prosecuted."
That is friggin ridiculous!!!!!!!!!!
Why doesn't the city decide what kind of haircuts are acceptable???
Oh, Yakima... you never fail to amuse me. Black tar heroin stealing the lives of your citizens, break-ins and robberies happening night and day, corruption in high places, and you want to focus on something this unbelievably silly.
Dave Edler obviously thinks he's the Mayor At God's Right Hand, leading the sinner to the Promised Land where women wear clothing that covers them head to toe. Why doesn't the Taliban, I mean the City Council, simply mandate burqas be worn by all women over the age of 12? Next it'll be no school learnin' for females of any age...
Coffee is coffee..............
Sell coffee not ............ "sex"
Don't even tell me that you can go there and buy coffee and not look at the girly girls, it is a ploy to get people to buy.You leave with what on your mind? Sex? exactly!
S-bucks has it 100 percent right. They are friendly, coffee is good and they don't need to sell half naked to get you to buy.
I would say the coffee must be really bad if they need the naked girls to sell it!!!!!!
I stand behind Dave Edler..
I know! Let's lobby the City Council to pass an ordinance and call for the arrest and detainment of every single person who wears their baseball cap sideways or backwards. I bet this would stop crime and gangsters from spreading their bad attitudes. Kind of like in Juvie in the old days - they would cut all their hair off, shave their heads, and send them back to school looking like the idiots they were.
Babes selling coffee in scanty clothes don't bother me or my sense of right and wrong NEARLY as much as those people who wear their hats every way but right.
Look out, people! The next thing you know, they'll outlaw dancing, skirts above the knee and makeup on teenage girls.......thongs are only the beginning!!!!
Report ViolationSeparation of Church/City Hall and Coffee, thank you very much. Dave....Earth to Dave: "YOU HAVE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS TO DO!!!!!" Perhaps, like NeoCons do so often, you are creating a distraction so people will forget about all the other things you can't get done.
Report ViolationLord knows if we didn't have high priority issues like this, they might have to look at why Yakima has the 5th lowest wages in the nation or why the city moved to Union Gap. I sense another blurb on CNN.
Report ViolationIt's too bad many can't separate the issue from Mayor Edler himself, whom I disagree with often, respectfully, but he doesn't deserve all this.
Report ViolationFor all you libs crying "Separation of Church and State" you really should read some history and the constitution. You'll be very disappointed that there is no such phrase in the constitution. There is nothing prohibiting the government from implementing morality laws, even if they are based on society's religious views. Our country was based on judeo christian values, and you can scream "separation of church and state" all you want, but it won't change that fact.
Report Violationit is things like this that remind me that this is why i moved from yakima.
the office is full of a bunch of pencle puchers that have nothing else better to do then just point the finger at others.
that is why it is pople like them that make yakima the ses pool of wash st.
some ladies my have the figer for it a some my not.
but dont you think for the ones that are in office need to take care of things in the office ...
and so are you going to make it a day in the week that you all have to were a suit ...
please..wake up pople you arnt a dame fashion consultint
crafty,
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you didn't leave Yakima to become an english teacher.
you bet.
but you know what i mean about this don't ya
and i hate typing lol
sjuan:
a couple things.
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am1.html
Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 to answer a letter from them written in October 1801. A copy of the Danbury letter is available here. The Danbury Baptists were a religious minority in Connecticut, and they complained that in their state, the religious liberties they enjoyed were not seen as immutable rights, but as privileges granted by the legislature - as "favors granted." Jefferson's reply did not address their concerns about problems with state establishment of religion - only of establishment on the national level. The letter contains the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," which led to the short-hand for the Establishment Clause that we use today: "Separation of church and state."
sjuan
The Separation Of Church and State
The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the 1st Amendment erected a "wall of separation" between the church and the state (James Madison said it "drew a line," but it is Jefferson's term that sticks with us today). The phrase is commonly thought to mean that the government should not establish, support, or otherwise involve itself in any religion. The Religion Topic Page addresses this issue in much greater detail.
in other words: who said it was in there. It's Jefferson's phrase describing an effect of the 1st. Amerndment.
Religion in the original Constitution
Religion makes only one direct and obvious appearance in the original Constitution that seems to point to a desire for some degree of religious freedom. That appearance is in Article 6, at the end of the third clause:
[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Perhaps you should do a little more research.
I think this story needs picture examples of what is not allowed....he he he....
Just kidding people, get a grip
What a waste of time!
Edler needs a "come to Jesus" moment about what is actually going on in this community and the real challenges we face.
There is obviously a real disconnect between Edler and the community, we are not his parishioners. I can't stand that our city is spending time on this when we have so many other issues that desperately need attention. I'll pray for him....that he gets a freaking clue.
I have been reading all of these comments for weeks and feel I can not keep quiet any longer. the use of "sexpresso" stand infuriates me. These places are not selling sex, in anyway. The mayor has accused these businesses of contributing to sex crimes against women and stated "If you want to create an environment where crime can happen, you turn a blind eye to adult businesses". I could not find one story on-line in regards to any violent crimes against costumed baristas. I could find thousands of stories about violent crimes against women in general. Violent crime against women is an all too familiar story. Were the 70 and 80 year old women who were beaten and raped in story after story dressed too provocatively? It is about ability to control and dominate, not how someone is dressed. This is the excuse used by people who feel they have a moral advantage over the rest of us. Why try to place blame on the woman who must have been wearing her skirt too short rather than the sick individual who would have raped regardless of apparel worn?
The mayor is wrong! These businesses do not fall under the "Adult Business" category nor are they even close. The girls who work in these businesses are not wearing thongs and see through clothing without something over and/or under them. They are wearing more layers of clothing than you see on girls walking down the street on a hot summer day. Are we going to regulate their shoes next because they are wearing some "smoking hot" thigh high boots that cover most of their leg but could be considered provocative? Where does it end? Do we call boxing matches "Adult Entertainment" because of the scantily clad ring girls selling their product? Ban major league foodbal with their half dressed cheerleaders? Should "Dancing with the Stars" go to late night television? I saw a similar costume on a barista as worn by a dancer from the show.
This is business and they are marketing start up businesses in an economy that is not conducive to starting new businesses. They are contributing to our city by generating sales tax revenue and their shops are not detracting from the "look" of the city, as they are all well cared for. Is their marketing strategy new? NO! Open a copy of any fashion or sports magazine, visit "Hooters" family restaurant or better yet, turn on public television. Some of them have the look of cigarette girls from the 1940's.
My next issue is on the ordinance itself. The council could not find a violation by any of these shops, could not find an ordinance or law applicable and could not get the health department or labor & industries to back them up, so they made an ordinance fit. These baristas are being regulated under the Sexual Offense Ordinance along with prostitution, sex offenders and sexual deviation. They have fit this into indecent exposure and when that did not fit, the Senior Assistant District Attorney, who stated,"There have been no verified incidents of baristas breaking the existing indecent exposure law", re-wrote the ordinance to fit their vision of indecent exposure. This is offensive!!
Lastly, JLEE of the deleted blog, these are not little girls, These are grown women who have the freedom to make their own decisions. They are also educated women who recognize the need for caution at all times because as women, 1 of every 6 will be raped in their lifetime. In regards to the Madam comment, you must be using it as a polite term of address for a woman because it sure does not fit the other definition. Once again these are not little girls forced into this labor in terrible working conditions. At least for now they have the freedom of choice although people like you who have not seen first hand the apparel worn and yet have chosen to be judge and jury, are working hard to take away those freedoms!
It’s easy enough for these baristas to dress with sex appeal, which can attract business, I’m sure, without showing off provocative buttock cleavage, or whatever you want to call it – just wear a skirt, that’s what they’re for! End of problem!!!
Speaking as a girl who was raised in South Carolina, I think these baristas should be given a choice. Either they cover their cleavage with clothing, or once a day let a policewoman (or policeman, with a witness) come around with a paddle and give each lawbreaker two pops, one on each offending buttock. That’ll make them stop, or at least think about it. The less they are wearing the more it will sting, trust me, so the punishment will really fit the crime!!! No cleavage, no spanking!
This is ridiculous.
This is AMERICA.
You're all scared of socialism but not censorship?
Please, this is getting rediculous! As the mayor he is doing his job! He is taking in considration all of the opinions! These girls and business owners are completely taking advantage of the ordinance! I just don't no why this new amendment is not being put in affect. Just to let all the wives and girlfriends aware here is a few hints to what's really going on; Tuesdays are post it note days (just post its covering the nipple)"I'm sure they stay on well, not!", and these girls are letting the men touch them (spank them ect.), for extra tips they are showing their privates (peep show), licking wiped cream off eachother on breast ect.( whipped shots), they are making out with eachother for extra tips, and they have code names for all these axtra ativities, their are some that have been seen getting into cars with men, they give out candy (tootsie rolls ect.) notice in your mates vehicles. They act different towards the womenn going through the stands, of course.
These men are going in different vehicles( riding with eachother) to hide the fact that they are visiting the sexpresso stands. "sorry guys we still see you even if you drive thru the side away from road!"
The only people sticking up for these stands are the ones that go there, work there, and own them.
I went by dream girls yesterday, they are wearing seethru clothes and thongs, while bending over for a view to each viewer to see at the new bigger windows.
and the posters that are on the building are showing a female dreamgirl with nothing on but a fishnet dress, " the loose nit fishnet", no underclothing at all.
These stands are in violation of the city ordinace, and the immorality toward the general pubilic.
These stands have no class!
This isn't a devision betweeen Church and State this is simply people that are gainig from selling sex, and supporting it. And men that are enjoying it, even if costs them their relationships!
Posting Guidelines - Updated Aug. 21 2009
Readers are encouraged to use these forums to discuss issues affecting the
Yakima Valley. Debate the ideas presented in stories and other comments, but
refrain from personal attacks and offensive remarks aimed at others; e.g.,
you may call an idea idiotic, but don't say the person is an idiot. The
Herald-Republic reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason.
Examples include material that is obscene, encourages illegal activity or
stereotypes based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs and
other factors. Continued violation of these guidelines can lead to
suspension or revocation of your ability to post comments. If you believe a
comment is inappropriate, you can bring it to our attention by clicking the
"report violation" link by each comment. Guidelines revised Aug. 21, 2009.
Registered User?
