Judge Grants City's Request to Shut Down Jiggles


lame Barnett, really lame
Popup Pete Holmes scores a run, but the game ain't over yet.
Maybe they should have stopped trying to game the system and opened up next to the Sunny Jim factory location?
So a bar full of degenerates (acros the street) is okay, but a strip club will destroy the community moral fiber.


PS...I meant the "degenerate" thing in the best possible way.
Lame. I'll have you know that Jiggles is bringing extra money into my favorite bar, Dante's. The ladies often stop by before their late afternoon shift and grab lunch. Way to help out the local economy, prudes.
How about this for a next step: If you don't like the law, work to get it changed, rather than just trying to pretend it doesn't exist.
@5 you just say that cause it's not a Stranger hangout.

@7 for the obvious win.
The sight of children offends me. Not only should they be kept behind closed doors, but they should be prohibited from congregating anywhere within 800 feet of an adult establishment. Because god forbid, a stripper might be exposed to one of them and end up psychologically damaged as a result.
@7 Often the best way to change laws is by challenging their validity in court, which is exactly what this guy has been doing. Perhaps Mr. Davis was expecting this and intends to continue litigation as this post suggests.

On the other hand, it seems like a "simple" relocation would faster and possibly cheaper.
I doubt Jiggles has "40 employees." The dancers are contractors who likely pay for stage time and shifts. Likely they will be able to do the same thing at the other multitude of strip joints around. I think this whole situation is pretty stupid, but hey, Jiggles put up a good fight and lost. Not a huge loss to the community or property rights as far as I'm concerned.
@11 What?
mul·ti·tude (mlt-td, -tyd)
1. The condition or quality of being numerous.
2. A very great number.
3. The masses; the populace: the concerns of the multitude.

I'm sure the frats are despondent over this.
Whatever, just move Jiggles to a spot that doesn't violate city code.
If the city doesn't like Jiggles where it is, then it can pay for them to move.
@15: Yes, I'm sure that's just how citizens want their tax dollars spent.

Um, no - the owner opened in that location knowing full well he was in violation of the City rules for siting strip clubs that HE HIMSELF had prompted the development of.

Mr.X@17 (and in passing bigyaz@7): the article asserts that Jiggles opened before the restrictions were put in place. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
The restrictions were put in place in 2007 after Mr. Davis forced the City to end its annual practice of renewing an annual moratorium on new strip club applications in court, and bravo for him. As a result, the City came up with a set of criteria determining where strip clubs could be located.

Mr Davis applied for and evidently was granted a permit in 2007 for an adult business at the then-Giggles Comedy Night Club (presumably before the City adopted the new rules dictating where these businesses could operate). Mr. Davis actually opened his club earlier this year - well after the City had established regulations that precluded this use at that location.

The City made a good-faith oversight in renewing his permit at this location, where Mr. Davis established his club in blatant (and bad faith) defiance of crystal clear land use codes that were put in place BEFORE he renovated Giggles and reopened it as a strip club.

At best, he should perhaps get his permit fees back if the permit was issued in error - but other than that he should go pound sand (which is what the judge told him to do in so many words).

This dumbass opened a strip club directly across the street from an elementary school knowing full well what the city law prohibits such a businessto operate in such close proximity. I have no sympathy for someone that stupid.
So, nothing of value was lost. Cool!
Mr. X--

Comedy club or strip club, I really don't see why it matters. No kids are allowed in either one, presumably.

Tell it to the Judge.

Under the Land Use Code, they are indeed considered to be different uses (and comedy clubs are not intrinsically 21 and over unless they serve booze)

@12 It is my belief that there is a great number of "gentleman's clubs" in the Seattle area. Displaced contract workers will likely be able to enter into a similar agreement with one of these establishments. Hope that clears up any confusion.
Man, I don't get it. You guys are siding with the city? I guess I'm just used to Portland, where we don't have these silly rules.