News

Five to Four

by Josh Feit

The most relevant fact--a city ban on strip clubs--has been absent from recent accounts about the abundant donations ($19,400 to City Council Member Judy Nicastro) made by Rick's strip club owner Frank Colacurcio Jr. and his associates. It's no wonder. Calling attention to the ban would contradict the stereotyping and sensationalist storyline which has catered to Seattle's Victorian lust for labeling strip clubs as dens of iniquity.

(If you don't believe the press has been breathlessly writing as if it's got a front seat at a Sopranos shoot, check out this gratuitous snippet from the July 19 Seattle Times describing Colacurcio Jr.: "sitting... at a massive desk littered with a wad of cash and a plate of steak and eggs.")

The story, as the press has it, is this: Colacurcio Jr. and more than 20 people affiliated with him made campaign donations in advance of a five-to-four council vote to rezone the parking lot of Rick's. (Nicastro heads the land use committee that ushered through the rezone.) It's a good story--the crux of which was first reported weeks ago by local community paper the Seattle Sun ["In Other News," June 19].

But the accounts have failed to mention why Colacurcio and his colleagues, in addition to wanting the immediate benefits of expanding his Lake City Way lot, would see fit to send so much money Nicastro's way. (The contributions represent 13 percent of Nicastro's $144,000 campaign cache.) Here's a theory: Nicastro has repeatedly extended Seattle's vague (and illegal?) ban on new strip clubs. In that time, Colacurcio has donated $5,450 to city hall--one time kicking in his cash just four days prior to the council vote on the ban. Preventing new strip clubs from opening in Seattle is obviously a boon for Colacurcio. (There are currently just four strip clubs in Seattle with only three owners.) Colacurcio wasn't available for a comment.

Neither Nicastro nor the city staffer who oversees the strip club "moratorium"--which is purportedly awaiting the results of a study that hasn't materialized in fifteen years--could explain the ban. In fact, when asked about it, the staffer referred me to Nicastro and Nicastro referred me to the staffer. Nicastro eventually acknowledged that the ban should go, but said she didn't feel compelled to lift it. Huh?

The ban on new strip clubs has been overlooked in recent accounts about Colacurcio's donations because that quid pro quo (keeping the ban in place) wouldn't trouble uptight Seattle. By the way, the parking lot rezone stipulated that Rick's hire more security and build a concrete barrier. In short, Nicastro's actually been towing the Victorian line.

If the Seattle Times or Nicastro had any gumption, they'd be focusing on the anticompetitive (just four strip clubs allowed in town?), condescending (just four strip clubs allowed in town?) ban that's likely at the root of Colacurcio's motivations and wealth. And they'd call for its repeal.

josh@thestranger.com