Gay D.C. Councilmember Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) introduced a bill that would allow displaced nude dance clubs to move to new locations but he has not acted on or spoken publicly about the measure since February. (Blade photo by Henry Linser)
Equality Maryland prepares for November battle at ballot box
Brauchli to replace oft-criticized Downie in September
Gay couples close to ‘legal parity with marriage under law’
advertisement
advertisement
|
LOU CHIBBARO J
Friday, April 27, 2007
The D.C. Alcoholic Beverage Control Board on April 19 voted 4 to 2 to deny a license application for nude dancing for a former gay nightclub displaced by the Washington Nationals baseball stadium, saying the club’s proposed new location in a warehouse district in Northeast Washington is off limits under the city’s liquor law.
Although the club, Edge-Wet, recently announced plans to change from a gay to a straight venue, the ABC Board ruling applies to at least two more gay nightclubs displaced by the stadium that offered nude dancing. One of the two, Ziegfeld’s-Secrets, wants to move to the same area where Edge-Wet hopes to reopen.
Eight gay entertainment businesses were forced to close last year due to stadium-related development. None has reopened.
In a statement released on the day of its decision, the six-member liquor board said it was “sympathetic to the transfer of the nightclub licenses held by the owners and businesses [that] have been displaced by or located near the construction of the baseball stadium.”
But the board said it was forced to uphold the city’s liquor law, which it claims prohibits nude dance licenses from being transferred to a location other than within a zone identical to the one in which the business had been operating before. Edge-Wet’s proposed new location is in the same zone as its previous location but is in a different “subzone,” which the board said violates existing law.
“As a regulatory body, we cannot and should not be making policy decisions,” it said. “That is best left to the elected officials of the District of Columbia and we request the [City] Council take this matter up expeditiously.”
No action on Graham bill
Gay activists were quick to note that the board’s action tosses the matter into the court of gay D.C. Councilmember Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), who chairs the Council committee with jurisdiction over liquor law issues.
In February, Graham introduced a bill that attorneys representing entertainment businesses said would clear the way for the nude dance clubs displaced by the stadium to move to new locations similar to the ones where they had been operating before.
But Graham, chair of the Council’s Committee on Public Works & the Environment, has not acted on or spoken publicly about his bill since introducing it.
Last year, he introduced an identical bill but withdrew it two months later, saying aides to then Mayor Anthony Williams advised him that a zoning law change was needed to allow the displaced clubs offering nude dancing to relocate.
Graham did not return calls inquiring about whether he plans to ask the Council to vote on his bill or whether he believes his bill would correct the issues raised by the ABC Board’s ruling on April 19.
“With some tinkering and a few technical changes, yes it would,” said attorney Andrew Kline, who serves as general counsel for the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington.
Kline, who specializes in liquor law cases and who has represented clubs offering nude dancing, said a zoning law change would not be needed to enable the displaced clubs to relocate if City Council approves Graham’s bill. According to Kline, a zoning change would be needed for businesses designated as “sexually oriented,” a category he said does not apply to nightclubs featuring only nude dancing.
“The law clearly states that you need nudity and sexual activity, either real or simulated, to meet the classification of a sexually oriented business,” Kline said. “The clubs we’re talking about here don’t fit that definition.”
Gay activists have joined customers and former employees of the gay businesses displaced by the stadium in expressing concern that the mayor and City Council have failed to fulfill their promise to help the clubs relocate.
Gay nightlife advocate and businessman Mark Lee said the displaced businesses have already been seriously damaged by the delays associated with finding a new location.
“Every day these businesses are closed decreases the likelihood that they will ever be able to reopen,” Lee said. “This shows the political will is not there. Clearly, this is a hot potato. Otherwise, legislation like Councilmember Graham’s bill would have passed by now.”
‘Restrictive’ view of law
After more than a year of searching for a suitable location, Edge-Wet found a building in a warehouse district on West Virginia Avenue, N.E., in a section known as Ivy City. Earlier this year, the ABC Board dismissed formal protests against the club by civic groups and the local Advisory Neighborhood Commission, leading owner Ron Hunt to believe he could reopen as an upscale “gentleman’s club” featuring nude female dancers.
Last week’s ruling by the board noted that the building at 2046 West Virginia Avenue, N.E., where Hunt expected to reopen, was in a CM1 zone and his original location at 56 L Street, S.E., was in a CM2 zone. Both zones permit the identical commercial and light manufacturing uses, with one allowing buildings slightly higher and wider than the other.
Rick Rosendall, vice president of the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance, said the liquor board has taken “the most restrictive possible interpretation” of a section of the law that GLAA had worked out with key members of City Council in 2001. At that time, the existing law banned the transfer of nude dance licenses altogether, causing the licenses to expire if owners decided to retire or were forced out of their existing location due to commercial real estate development.
“If the lawyers for the affected businesses deem Jim Graham’s bill sufficient, then that is the legislative vehicle to rally around,” Rosendall said. “It would be helpful if those who enjoy patronizing those establishments would raise their voices, since there is no shortage of prudes even within the gay community.
“We in GLAA continue to maintain that the prohibition against nude dancing in ABC-licensed establishments is outrageous and ridiculous and that adults are fully capable of making their own entertainment choices without the interference of bluenoses and busybodies,” he said.
Existing law places a cap on the number of nude dance clubs in the District, allowing the ones in business since the 1980s to continue while banning any new ones from opening. The licenses for the three gay nightclubs that offered nude dancing before being displaced by the stadium are being held at the offices of the city’s Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration. About a dozen nude dance clubs with female dancers catering to a straight clientele continue to operate mostly in the downtown business district.
Liquor law attorneys have said the law in theory would allow the gay clubs to move to the downtown district. However, other restrictions, such as a prohibition against opening such a club within 600 feet from a residential building, school, library or park make it nearly impossible to find an acceptable location, the attorneys have said.
The existing straight clubs with nude dancing in the downtown area have been allowed to remain where they are under a “grandfather” clause in the law. If forced to move from their current locations, it would be highly unlikely that they could find new locations, according to Kline and others familiar with liquor law issues because residential development in the downtown area has mushroomed, making it nearly impossible for a nude dance club to find a space greater than 600 feet from a residence.
|
