You are here: http://dancersurvey.com

"And the neon sign said:
'Welcome to Sleazy Town!
Welcome to Sleazy Town,
Sleazy, Sleazy Town!'
City Hall killed off that scene
Now Sleazy Town is just a dream"

—The Kinks, from the album "Think Visual" (1986)

Mayor White to Houston cabaret people:

The City of Houston has renewed its campaign against strip clubs. The mayor's attitude toward cabaret dancers, employees, and clientele can be summed up in just two words.

They have all of the dogmatism of brevity:

Drop Dead!

After a decade of defending the ordinance in court, it appears that 2008 may be the year when the city attacks the clubs with the full force of the ordinance. The clubs are particularly vulnerable to the provisions regulating the locations of clubs. If the city's threats take hold, many clubs may be forced to close.

Thousands of jobs are in jeopardy. That is what this page is all about.

For people who have followed this story for a long time, the city's current campaign is the proverbial "Deja Vu all over again." In 1997, the clubs also seemed to face immediate closure. It didn't happen then, but it may be happening now.

The survey below was taken a decade ago. We believe that the results still reflect the likely results of the SOB law should it be fully implemented in the way it is written.

Houston Chronicle coverage

TEN YEARS OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY

During the first decade of the Houston SOB law, club owners have kept enforcement at bay though a combination of legal challenges, the hiring of licensed dancers, and the hiring of unlicensed dancers with latex covered breasts and bikini bottoms.

The clubs make the latex available in gallon jars. It smells like ammonia. You don't have to be a doctor to doubt that it benefits a person's health. You wouldn't put it on your children as a reward for being good.

Yet, it is the way the dancers of Houston have kept out of jail. It is a daily fact of life for women placed under the gun by the Houston SOB ordinance.

Now that the courts have given the city the green light for full enforcement, even previously licensed dancers will are piling latex on their breasts. That is because most strippers now find themselves working at clubs which can't qualify for the SOB license.

And the SOB enforcement is not the only law to target cabaret clubs. At the very same time this fall, the clubs face two additional intrusions into their operations:

(1) A $5.00 per customer door tax which goes to the state of Texas. Purportedly the funds will go toward the relief of women who are victims of sexual assault.

This tax will inevitably discourage casual drop in visits to clubs. It will particularly threaten small clubs with few dancers and slow shifts in all clubs. Until now, few small clubs have collected a cover charge on day shifts and on slow nights such as Sunday and Monday. Now those shifts will need someone at the door just to collect money for the state.

That will be the case even if a club has just opened its doors and no dancer is ready to go on stage. In small clubs, it is not unusual for the first dancer to go on stage an hour after the front door opens. (Since dancers are independent contractors, no manager can be certain of having any particular number of dancers at any given time.) Customers will learn to take a hard look at the number of cars in a club parking lot before they pay $5 for a peek inside.

This law emerged with little resistance from the clubs. At this point, club owners would be smart if they removed all of their own cover charges, leaving the state tax as the only door fee. They could then put up bold notices advising customers that the Texas legislature has singled them out as potential rapists and list the legislators who voted for the charge. This is nothing less than a presumption of guilt and the punishment of a large group for the crimes of a few.

This selective tax is the brainchild of State Rep. Ellen Cohen, a freshman Democrat and president of the Houston Area Women's Center. The law is is aimed exclusively at sexually oriented businesses that provide live entertainment. "Potential rapists" whose sexual entertainment proclivities are limited to the internet and DVD's won't be hassled by this one.

Cohen gushed, "I am simply thrilled that this bill will help provide much-needed services for sexual assault survivors." Cohen further trumpeted that "This victory was in honor of the over 1.9 million sexual assault survivors in Texas today and in memory of those who did not survive." A substantial amount will go directly to rape crisis centers.

Actually, only the first $18 million of the $87 million expected will go to sexual assault education, treatment, prevention and research. The rest will go into the general coffers of the state.

My view on this type of funding mentality is pretty straightforward: Why stop there?

If we are to surmise that club clientele are potential rapists, we can also conclude that many a case of AIDS has started from a meeting in a gay club. If strip clubs must bear the onus of helping rape victims, then, the gay nightclubs should charge patrons $5 a head for treating the victims of AIDS.

Similar modest proposals come to mind.

How about . . .

• A fat tax for all patrons of fast food restaurants. They can be made to pay an extra $1 each time they drive though even if all they buy is a small Coke. The presumption here is that fast food customers will get fat and drive up health care costs for all. The obese can also be made to pay for the extra space they take up in a crowded room.
  
  
• A daily tax on each police officer to pay for the cost of prosecuting cops who take bribes. The logic here is that since some police take bribes, all cops should pay. This is just as logical as making all club customers pay for the few who might commit a sex crime.
  
  
• A special surtax for all types of businesses known to benefit from the cheap labor of illegal aliens. The funds would pay for the health and education costs of illegal aliens and for beefed up border patrol.

No, I am not seriously suggesting these taxes. In any event, they can never happen. The gay community, the restaurant industry, law enforcement officers, and illegal alien advocates all have considerable influence in the Texas legislature.

Strippers and cabaret club employees do not. They will always be weakly represented due to their high turnover and unwillingness to make their occupation publicly known. And although many club patrons have wealth and influence, few seek the kind of notoriety which comes from defending strip bars.

Austin Chronicle article on the state tax

(2) As of September 1, 2007, smoking is prohibited in most Houston bars, including cabaret clubs.

Perhaps 80% of all dancers smoke. They now have one more reason not to work in Houston. Also, most people who go to topless bars to drink also happen to be smokers. The effect on business volume is not hard to predict. Neither is the effect on the frayed nerves of smokers in bars.

Although the elimination of smoking is a worthy goal, some might question this further use of the heavy hand of government. For the strip clubs, it happens to be coming at a particularly bad time.

Add these three laws together, and you have the cabaret club equivalent to the Perfect Storm. Strip club opponents could not have planned it better if they had tried.

BLOOD IN THE STREETS

I will conclude this section with some personal remarks. While the City of Houston government horses around with the three foot rule, the 1500 foot rule, and the Smoke Police, the city itself is falling apart at the seams. To compare Houston to a jungle would be an insult to any self respecting rain forest.

I will mention three recent experiences of my own:

• In March, 2006, I was the victim of a robbery which included a violent assault. It was a sneak attack from behind while I was attaching my bicycle to a rack on my car.
  
  The African American assailant demanded that I turn over my money. Without giving me a chance to do so, he began to pound my face furiously and repeatedly. The effect was that I was so thoroughly stunned that it took me a long time to find my wallet and give it to him. Minutes later, he was at a gas station using one of my credit cards.
  
  That gangsta thug attack led to nearly $6000 in medical expenses. I have reason to believe that the thug was one of the mayor's many guests from New Orleans.

• In October, 2006, someone broke the side window of my vehicle, and stole a case of educational mp3 CD's (Sorry, no rap) and a cell phone.

• In October, 2007, I was accosted by a Hispanic gang at a gas station. They demanded that I hand over free "gas money." They were loud and aggressive, and there was an implied threat of violence.
  
  The ringleader asked, "What's the matter? Don't you like Mexicans?"
  
  I may be a bit Old School, but I failed to understand how his being a "Mexican" entitled him to my money. At that point, I feared the worst. It was impossible to misconceive the threat or to exaggerate the danger.
  
  To avoid another emergency room visit. I made a mad dash to my car, abandoning my gasoline purchase and dropping the gasoline hose to the pavement.
  
  Before I could pull away, the gang leader punched a hole the size of a quarter into my car trunk door. He later charged over $20 in gasoline to my credit card.
  
  We hear it said that cabaret clubs "attract" crime. You bet they do. So do gasoline stations and lots of other places. In today's lawless Houston environment, wherever a thug wants to be — there he is .
  

Crime hit me three times in nineteen months. Two of the robberies involved the fraudulent use of credit cards at gas pumps, locations likely to have a video record. Each event was fully reported to police. None of these thug attacks ever lead to an arrest. Not even close.

For very selfish reasons, I would rather see the police solving these crimes than measuring the thickness of latex on breasts.

I used to seldom feel threatened in Houston. Prior to March, 2006, I had never been physically attacked during my five decades in the city. I had also gone for over 20 years without even a minor theft to report.

The reality is that the quality of pubic safety in Houston is deteriorating fast. There are a number of reasons for this — none of them alleviated by the current city administration.

Houston is not the benign place where I grew up. It is a city with blood in the streets -— my blood.

In 2002, State Representative Debra Danburg was voted out of office. That was a result of a redistricting which made it difficult to elect a feminist, liberal Democrat in favor of gay marriage. Ironically, her seat was taken by Martha Wong, a conservative Republican who had joined Danburg in opposing Houston topless bars.

Cabaret clubs have a way of getting hit from both sides of the political spectrum.

The longest quotation in the column to the right is from The Closing of the American Mind. The late Allan Bloom (1930-1992) addresses the unlikely alliance between feminists and conservatives in fighting sexually oriented businesses. It seems that the alliance between feminists and gays is made of sterner stuff than the one between feminists and conservatives.

I am also reminded of the words of Jack London, the author of Call of the Wild and Sea Wolf: "A man who is normal sexually conceives of women in ways repellant to a homosexual man." Many feminists have the same reaction to men who are unambiguously heterosexual.

This page is not intended to promote a favorable view of topless clubs, nude clubs, or cabaret clubs. The purpose is neither to support nor to condemn topless bars as business enterprises. This writer is not a spokesman for the cabaret club industry.

The issues here are occupational, not sociological or moral. The research on this page simply addresses this question: What might happen to employment if an industry that has already been allowed to thrive is suddenly destroyed by a new set of laws?

If the city succeeds in its current campaign against the clubs, that question will finally be answered.

Grady McAllister, MS (Occupational Technology)

Note: The section about Gregg Easterbrook has moved to a separate page. My commentary responds to some disparaging and misleading remarks that Easterbrook made about this web page. The material also gives some additional background about why this paper was developed and how it is maintained on this web site.

Response to Gregg Easterbrook's remarks about the Houston Topless Dancer Survey.

Continuous strip club news coverage

The original survey material follows below.

CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE REGULATED KIND

By Grady McAllister

The research paper below was presented May 5, 1997.

© 1997, 2008 by Grady McAllister . All Rights Reserved.

— Edward Gibbon

THE PROBLEM

This study looks at a controversial industry as it prepares to deal with an intensive new set of regulations. The industry is topless clubs. More euphemistically, they are called "cabaret clubs" or "gentleman's clubs." By whatever name, they are an industry which has thrived in Houston since the oil boom years of the 1970's.

This paper does not attempt to resolve the moral, social, or legal issues which revolve around the clubs. It is concerned exclusively with:

BACKGROUND

On January 15, 1997, the City of Houston enacted sweeping new regulations regarding so-called "Sexually Oriented Businesses." The law, scheduled to take effect on May 15, 1997, affects 119 licensed businesses in Houston. The ordinance affects several types of businesses, including topless clubs and nude clubs.

When the ordinance becomes effective, most existing clubs will no longer be legal. This is due to a doubling of the distance that clubs must be from residences, churches, schools, nursery schools, and parks.

There are currently 43 clubs operating in the Houston area, most of them within the city limits. Only about five or six are likely to meet the distance requirements of the new law.

Because of the time and money that would be involved, none of the existing clubs are expected to move before May 15. Instead, many will be will be allowed to operate until they have recouped their investment. Eventually they will have to close.

Industry estimates are that between 10,000 and 20,000 people are threatened with losing their jobs. Council member Helen Huey disputes those estimates and accuses the industry of "cooking their books."

Figures that high would probably have to include all people who work at any kind of Sexually Oriented Business during the course of a year. The Houston Chronicle has accepted 4,000 to 5,000 as the number of dancers currently working.

Politicians across the political spectrum have hailed the new ordinance. Paradoxically, many of the supporters find themselves on opposite sides of other sex-related issues such as gay rights and abortion.

One highly visible proponent of the law was State Representative Debra Danburg. She is a feminist, a gay rights advocate, a champion of multiculturalism, and a promoter of "hate crime" legislation.

Danburg entered the arena early when she opposed the licensing of a new club in the Greenway Plaza area. That abortive effort helped place a renewed onus on all the clubs and a push for new regulation.

According to Danburg, one purpose of the law is to cost the clubs money. Danburg stated in a television interview, "If nothing else, we can cost them a few hundred thousand dollars in attorney's fees."

The ordinance is also supported by conservatives such as Republican Council member Martha Wong.

City Council candidate Karen Christopher equates topless bars with pornography. During a City Council hearing last January she stated:

I am asking you to take a hard stand. You have few people here to oppose this ordinance except for males who attend topless bars to satisfy their addiction to pornography.

Longtime anti-pornography crusader Geneva Kirk Brooks echoes the comparison. She also compares the clubs to prostitution. Brooks wants to see all forms of Sexually Oriented Businesses put in a single "red light" district in an industrial area. Her proposal would place the clubs alongside legalized houses of prostitution. So far, no one on City Council is willing to go that far.

In the meantime, club owners are fighting the new ordinance and are expected to seek a temporary restraining order against its enforcement. One organization which represents the clubs, the Greater Houston Entertainment Association, is urging each dancer to contribute one dollar during each shift toward attorney fees.

Speaking for club owners, lead counsel Joe W. Meyer stated, "I think that whatever decision is made by the trial and appellate courts…this case is going to influence peoples' lives all over the US. It will define the limits by which we are governed, and define what is in excess of those limits and what is not."

In addition to the distance requirement, the law contains two other provisions that would have a significant impact on the industry:

1. A requirement that a dancer obtain a license to work. To apply for the license, a dancer must pay $29.00, submit fingerprints and two photographs, and undergo a background check.

After May 15, 1997, anyone caught dancing topless without a license could be jailed for up to two years and fined $2000.

Proponents of licensing say it will screen out dancers who have been convicted of certain criminal activity. The offenses listed include sexual assault, prostitution, and possession of child pornography.

If an application is approved, a dancer's license will be posted at the club where she works. She will be required to wear a badge with her stage name and an identification number.

The licensing information will be public due to the state open records law. A dancer's real name will be available to anyone who submits her badge number under an open records request. Her address will be available as part of the public record. The Houston Police Department will maintain the records and keep a log of persons who access the information.

Critics of the provision say that it is an invasion of privacy and an open invitation to stalkers. They say that a Police log is not enough to restrain many potential troublemakers.

Another objection is that licensing creates a permanent record. The permanency of the record may discourage many from ever entering the occupation.

2. Dancers will have to remain at least three feet away from a customer while performing a table dance.

Proponents of the rule say that the distance is necessary to prevent physical contact between customers and entertainers.

Critics say the rule will make a customer less likely to pay for a table dance. Also, you would have to reduce the number of tables to keep that much space around every customer.

S.O.B. ORDINANCE:
PROBLEM OR SOLUTION ?

I think this gives us the tool to fight awesomely, definitively --the intrusion of these businesses and the harm they do…They will not be able to do it to the detriment of our children and our neighborhoods.

Critics of the ordinance say that the clubs already keep children out. They say that the clubs are already well away from child-related areas. They say that the purpose of the law is not to regulate the businesses but to destroy them. Referring to City Council, Bob Furey, president of the Colorado Bar and Grill, stated, "They have absolutely no respect for the individuals who make their living in these establishments."

Although the ordinance passed by a unanimous vote, some Council Members felt it went too far. "We have in effect, with this legislation, put this business out of business," said Councilman John Castillo.

Backers like Helen Huey state that they are only trying to install new regulations: That the law is not an effort to decimate the industry.

PURPOSE OF STUDY

Last year, a number of dancers appeared before the Houston City Council and spoke against the ordinance. However, there has been no known effort to systematically ascertain their views. The material which follows is a survey of dancer opinion regarding the new law.

This study gauges their opinions in these four areas:

1. What do the dancers think of the justification for the law?

2. How will the law influence willingness to work in clubs?

3. How will the law affect future employment in the industry?

4. How will the law affect future earnings in the industry?

IMPORTANCE OF ISSUES

In addition the practical concerns of the dancers, the survey will seek insight into one larger issue:

This leads to the following secondary issues:

1. How much does this discourage people from staying in the industry?

2. How much does this discourage new people from entering the industry?

The clubs only exist only to the extent that women are willing to work in them. If the law reduces the number of women willing to work in a topless bar, the law will reduce the size of the industry. On the other hand, if the law makes no difference to the dancers, then it is, in fact, just a new set of regulations.

This study seeks to uncover the true nature of the law as it is seen by the people whom it will most affect.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

For the purposes of this study only a few specialized terms are necessary. Some of the following terms are common words; they are specialized in that they are applied in a specific, limited context.

Club. A nightclub which features dancing for the purpose of entertaining the clientele who visit the nightclub. There are many other terms for topless bars and nude bars, many of which are pejorative. However, "club" is the term generally used among the dancers and their clientele following.

Dancer. A person who works as an entertainer in a club. In the context of a topless bar the terms "dancer" and "entertainer" can be used interchangeably most of the time.

Law. Unless otherwise noted, the word "law" refers to the Houston Sexually Oriented Business Ordinance as passed by the Houston City Council on January 15, 1997.

Law. Unless otherwise noted, the word "law" refers to the Houston Sexually Oriented Business Ordinance as passed by the Houston City Council on January 15, 1997.

Sexually Oriented Business. Any business which the City of Houston has labeled "sexually oriented" within the text of the Sexually Oriented Business ordinance.

Table dance. A dance performed at a customer's table.

The text of the Houston Sexually Oriented Business law defines a number of specialized terms. Many of the definitions are rather graphic. However, it is not necessary to include them in this study. The text of the ordinance is added as an appendix.

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS
OF THIS STUDY

This study will be completed before the Sexually Oriented Business law goes into effect. Accordingly, it is limited to current opinion about the law and to current opinion about future outcomes. It can not tell us what opinion will be if, and when, the law goes into full effect.

Also, the survey can not determine the actual long-term results of the law. It may, however, suggest areas for a future longitudinal study.

This survey is limited to conventional, legally licensed topless bars featuring female dancers.

This study specifically does NOT address:

Click here only if your are interested in reading the Review of Literature and Methodology. These are sections commonly included in academic papers. However, the material may contain more detail than you would like.

OTHERWISE, CONTINUE READING ON THIS PAGE. THE ACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE SURVEY FOLLOW BELOW.

FINDINGS

This section presents the findings of the dancer study. There are eleven questions on the survey form. Each of the questions relates to one of the original research questions. Here, again, are the four research questions:

1. What do the dancers think of the justification for the law?
2. How will the law influence willingness to work in clubs?
3. How will the law affect future employment in the industry?
4. How will the law affect future earnings in the industry?

RESEARCH QUESTION NO. 1: What do the dancers think of the justification for the law?

The first three questions on the survey form support this research question. The dancers are asked to evaluate the law in a very general way.

These three questions make no reference to dancers and people working in clubs. The participants are encouraged to respond as citizens, rather than as people with a stake in the industry.

1. According to the preamble of the new law, clubs have a "dehumanizing influences on churches, schools, and day care centers."

Do you agree that clubs create problems for churches, schools, and day care centers?

__Strongly agree
__Somewhat agree
__Somewhat disagree
__Strongly disagree

2. Another reason given for the new law is that clubs encourage crime. Do you agree with the idea that clubs encourage criminal activity?

___Strongly agree
___Somewhat agree
___Somewhat disagree
___Strongly disagree

3. The new law doubles the distance that clubs must be from schools, day care centers, churches, and residences. Many businesses will have to close down or move.

Do you agree that it is a good idea to shut down those businesses?

__ Strongly agree
__ Somewhat agree
__ Somewhat disagree
__ Strongly disagree

As expected, the dancers gave no great endorsement of the law. On the other hand, their support for the clubs was less than monolithic.

The weakest level of support came on the "family-oriented" question, "Do you agree that clubs create problems for churches, schools, and day care centers?" Only 62 % checked "strongly disagree." However, when the "somewhat disagree" responses are added in the pro-club answers rise to 92%.

The dancers responded more emphatically on the question, "Do you agree with the idea that clubs encourage criminal activity?" A full 81% answered "strongly disagree." By adding in the "somewhat disagree" respondents, the pro-club answers again rise to 92%.

For the question, "Do you agree that it is a good idea to shut down those businesses?" 73% strongly disagreed and 22 % somewhat disagreed. The remaining 5% selected "somewhat agree."

The reader might wonder why any dancer would respond in a way unfavorable to the clubs. After all, her own livelihood is at stake. Here are some explanations that could be considered:

For example, she may not know that existing law already keeps clubs some distance from churches, schools, and day care centers. Also, she might think that any business encourages crime if it is open to the public late at night.

I mention these possibilities based on what I have learned about the industry and some of the comments heard while conducting the survey. None is offered as a hard and fast explanation.

There is, no doubt, a complicated psychology involved whenever people express opinions that go against their apparent self-interest. The answer is beyond the scope of this paper, and the issue is best studied by people who are fully engaged in the behavior sciences.

RESEARCH QUESTION NO. 2:
How will the law influence willingness to work in clubs?

The following survey questions refer to aspects of the law which may affect a woman's willingness to work in clubs:

4. The new law requires that all persons who become dancers undergo a background check and pay $29 for a license application. They must also provide photographs and fingerprints.

What do you think of the following statement? The licensing process will discourage women from becoming dancers--even if they have nothing to hide.

__Strongly agree
__Somewhat agree
__Somewhat disagree
__Strongly disagree

Forty-five per cent strongly agreed and 14% somewhat agreed that the law will discourage women from becoming dancers.

However, the results are bimodal. A surprisingly high number (27%) picked the response that was least favorable to the clubs and said that they "strongly disagreed" with the statement.

This may be partly explained by a sudden change in the pattern of the questions. For the first three questions, "strongly disagree" was the answer most favorable to the clubs while for questions 4 it is the least favorable. It is also worth noting that four of the participants who eventually choose "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" had first marked "strongly disagree." They apparently corrected their answers when they decided they meant the opposite of their original choice.

The question will be reworked for any future surveys.

5. According to a televised police statement (KHOU-TV, 2/25/97), when a dancer receives a license, her real name and address will become available to the public. This is due to the Texas open records law.

How high is the risk that a dancer will be vulnerable to stalkers and other people she wants to avoid?

__Very high
__High
__Low
__Very Low

95% agreed that licensing will lead to a "high" or "very high" risk that a dancer will be vulnerable to stalkers and other people she wants to avoid.

6. Estimate the percentage of current dancers who will quit working because of the licensing requirement:

___More than 50%
___20 to 50 %
___10 to 20%
___1 to 10%
___Less than 1%

81% of the dancers responded that at least 20% of dancers will quit work because of the licensing requirement; 46% predicted that more than 50% will quit.

7. What are the chances that you will quit working in clubs if the new law goes into effect?

___Very high
___High
___Low
___Very Low

When asked to predict their own behavior, slightly under one half predicted that they would quit working if the new law goes into effect: 19% answer "high" and 30% answered "very high."

RESEARCH QUESTION NO. 3:How will the law affect future employment in the industry?

This research question overlaps somewhat with research question no. 2. However, the previous survey items emphasized the possibility that a woman might avoid or quit the business as a result of the licensing requirement. The following questions look at the possibility that she might be thrown out of work because either (1) no job at all is available or (2) a job is available but it pays so little that she decides to quit.

Survey questions:

8. If you were to quit working in clubs as a result of the law what would be the main reason?

___There will be so few clubs left that it will be hard to find a job.
___The jobs will be available, but it will be hard to earn a living
___I don't want to go though the licensing process.
___Other (Please describe.)___________________________________

Only 19% agreed that there would be so few clubs left it would be hard to find a job. However, 56% checked the statement, "The jobs will be available, but it will be hard to earn a living."

This was the only question which allowed the possibility of an open-ended response. For those who wrote their own answers at the "other" box the responses were revealing:
-- "I wouldn't want everyone knowing my address."
--"I have other experience."
-- "The clubs would be too far away."
--"I don't think our addresses should be public access."

9. If the expected number of clubs close, how high will unemployment get for the people who now work in them?

___Very high
___High
___Moderate
___Low
___Very low

87% of the respondents agreed the unemployment for club people will get "high" or "very high."

RESEARCH QUESTION NO. 4: How will the law affect future earnings in the industry?

The final two survey questions address directly the issue of income:

10. The new law requires that dancers stay three or more feet from a customer during a table dance. By staying three feet away, a dancer will…(Check one)

___Increase her income
___Decrease her income
___See no difference in her income

86% of the respondents indicated that the three-foot rule will decrease their income.

11. To what extent will the law make it harder for you to earn a living?

___Much harder
___Somewhat harder
___No effect

89% believed that the law will make it "somewhat harder" or "much harder" to earn a living. A preponderance of 54% fell into the "much harder" column.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

On January 15, 1997, the City of Houston passed a new ordinance to regulate Sexually Oriented Businesses. This paper addresses the parts of the law aimed at topless clubs and the dancers who work in them. It studies three main issues:

As of May 5, 1997, club attorneys had filed a barrage of lawsuits in an effort to hold back the ordinance.

Mike DeFeurin, an attorney representing several of the clubs, says he will appear before a state district judge at a hearing on May 13. He will ask the judge to prevent the city from enforcing the provisions of the ordinance. In the lawsuit, DeFeurin outlines his position:

Without expressly banning topless dancing, the City of Houston has in effect done just that--regulating a lawful and constitutionally protected business out of business.

Joe W. Meyer an attorney representing another group of clubs, has asked a federal judge to block enforcement of the three-foot rule and the licensing of dancers. As of May 5, only 10% of the Houston dancers had applied for the license.