“There’s a reasonable argument to be made that what happens in front of your business is your responsibility.”

There is an even more reasonable argument that the establishment is only responsible for what goes on inside the establishment, rather than the public areas that may have incidents completely unrelated.

i think that there is a reasonable amount that clubs should be required to maintain outside their doors.

Second, what exactly do you expect clubs to do? They are not the police, and even if they were, the good ones evict people before any laws have been broken. And what happens if they do call the police? It goes on record as a violent incident.

I shouldn't be surprised by this law. This, afterall, is the same bunch of goody-two-shoes who passed the four-foot rule to run strip clubs out of business.

Hey Woodinville - looking for a city council? Have we got a group for you!

Now that she's starting to assert herself, I'm not sure I like what I see.

- Significantly increases fines for noise violations from $500 up to $6,000 per violation with no warning.

- Amends the current Mark Sidran era vaugue and potentially racist "nuisance" ordinances so the city could more easily close down clubs

- Requests the mayor to consider even more regulations on nightlife establishments , including more licenses for things like 'bouncers'.

- Makes business owners responsible for actions of individuals not on their premises, who may not even be their customers, even though the business owner legally can take no steps to control the individual's behavior. Club owners are also not allowed to hire off duty SPD officers to patrol outside their venues to deter any violence, taking a tool away from the industry that large concert promoters and sports teams are allowed.

- Creates more fees and more regulations for an already risky and suffering industry without offering any support.

- Ignores the real concerns of the neighbors, doing nothing to decrease street crime in neighborhoods and nothing to deal with noise and nuisance created by people on the street at night.

If this entire package were to be adopted, Seattle would have some of the most stringent nightlife regulations in the country. This is an anti-music, anti-nightlife, nanny state proposal. Sally Clark has also backed the Mayor's insane strip club 4-foot rule. Clark is head of the City's Neighborhood and Economic develpment committee yet has offered no economic development ideas to support the music industry, just more licenses and regulations that will harm the industry.

The Nightlife industry has met with Clark several times, offering ideas that would help solve the real issues of urban density and nightlife. Our input has been largely ignored.

It appears that Councilmember Clark is intent on seeking approval of all elements of the package! This would have a devastating impact our music industry!!

Your voice needs to be heard now and loud.

First, email the City Councilmembers today demanding they not support this horrid proposal. Then attend the June 4th public hearing on this package. It begins at 5:30. Get there early to sign up! This hearing is in the City Council Chambers on the 2nd floor of City Hall located at 600 - 4th Ave downtown.

Below are the emails to the councilmembers:

Nick.licata@seattle.gov 684-8803
Sally.clark@seattle.gov 684-8802 **
Richard.conlin@seattle.gov 684-8805
David.della@seattle.gov 684-8806**
Jan.drago@seattle.gov 684-8801
Jean.godden@seattle.gov 684-8807**
Richard.mciver@seattle.gov 684-8800
Tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov 684-8808**
Peter.steinbrueck@seattle.gov 684-8804**

** indicates these members are up for reelection this year. Peter Steinbrueck is not seeking reelection and this will be an open seat.

watch www.seattlenma.org for updates and more info

""The data ... doesn't show that this is such a widespread problem that I could support licensing an entire class of businesses," said City Councilwoman Sally Clark, who leads the committee considering Nickels' proposal."

The Mayor proposed the license originally and always lobbies for his proposals. (Our elected City Attorney, who seems to be the secret 10th Councilmember here, is strongly pushing for this license as well.)

She is now proposing a license. What gives?

Much like the 25-foot rule with the smoking ban, this 50-foot rule is problematic.

Sally Clark is a white middle aged, middle class lesbian with white middle aged, middle class values. Prove to me she's not a complete teetotaler. Her lesbianism is irrelevant, and I would never call her queer.

She's close to my age, we share a sexual orientation, and we probably both vote democrat. Other than that, we have very very little in common. If there was anyone else to vote for, I'd do it. Don't let her pull a Cheney or Guiliani on you. Pro-gay values don't equal progressiveness.

"I know there's a lot of argument over is there a real impact versus the perception. (But) people take that perception pretty darned seriously," said Councilwoman Sally Clark, who was not on the council when the rules were approved but supports them. "I don't think that makes me a prudish person," she said.

Who's surprized? Not me.