Cobb commissioners adopt major changes to sex shop ordinance

Cobb sex shop changes
A mobile sign in front of the new Tokyo Valentino store on Johnson Ferry Road has been removed.

The Cobb Board of Commissioners on Tuesday approved major changes to the county code governing the operation of sexually oriented businesses.

Commissioners adopted the new ordinance provisions on its consent agenda, and after a second required public hearing attracted no speakers.

The code amendments would limit sex shops and other adult businesses to two industrial zoning categories. All such businesses would be required to obtain a special license and employees would have to be issued a special permit.

(You can read through the code amendments here. Reader discretion is advised, since there are some explicit descriptions of sexual acts, body parts and devices.)

The aim is to combat what a lawyer consulting with the Cobb County Attorney’s office calls the “adverse secondary effects” of sexually oriented businesses, including crime and loitering, to nearby areas.

The changes come after Tokyo Valentino, an Atlanta-based adult retail chain, opened a store on Johnson Ferry Road in the former Mattress Firm location across from Merchant’s Walk.

The store was granted a business license as a general retail operation under the name 1290 Clothing Co., but opened as Tokyo Valentino.

Another Tokyo Valentino store opened in Sandy Springs last year under similar circumstances.

The ordinance changes also prohibit sexually oriented businesses from operating within 750 feet of residentially zoned land, within 1,500 feet of a school, religious facility, government-owned or run building, 1,000 feet of another sexually oriented business and 500 feet of another business licensed to sell alcohol, either on premises or a package store.

While nobody spoke in favor of or against the code amendments during the public hearings, Daniel White, who began an online petition against Tokyo Valentino, told East Cobb News he was sending a written statement in support of the measures.

Here’s what he submitted for the record:

“Based on the short notice and change to live public comments vs. online comments, I am submitting this on behalf of the 2,906 people who have signed the change.org petition to reject the sex shop on Johnson Ferry. I believe good can come from this for all Cobb County residents and not just the residents of East Cobb. The well researched common sense changes to the ordinance have our support to—as well outlined—establish reasonable and uniform regulations that prevent the secondary deleterious effects of these businesses in residential areas.

“These regulations are limiting and not prohibitive. They allow for the rights to operate these businesses and take into consideration common sense conditions for operating. Since the shop has opened it has installed outdoor color changing strobe like dance lights on the front and parked a large explicit mobile sign in front as well. We are certain that these ‘near legal tactics’ will continue. The sexually oriented permanent sign is tragedy to the progress we have made in the awareness of sexualizing and exploiting women. It’s tasteless and taunting. If the owner wanted to work with the community he would not continue to lie and hide. 

“In thIs meeting of Cobb County commissioners, we support the affirmative vote on the sweeping changes to the Cobb County sexually oriented business ordinances effectively putting these businesses where they belong—not out of business as it is their right—but out of our neighborhoods by effectively banning their operations near schools, residences, and churches.

“This means that the 2,906 people who have signed this that represent nearly 9,000 east cobb residents will have had a positive voice in government. In today’s day, you should not have to show up to a specific meeting to have your voices heard. There are so many listening avenues and I’m glad you have heard us, worked hard and found ways to balance business and resident input. The well researched 30 page document outlines the blight these businesses cause and the trouble they bring. It is naive and insulting to say that opponents of this ordinance are ‘just a bunch of moms.’ Because it is not a bunch of ‘moms’ that keep these places open and frequent them enough to stay open. It is people who go often. It’s the rule of any business and if you’re in a sex shop often you don’t need to be 3/10’s of a mile from a school or within a few hundred yards of kids walking to school, a Chick-fil-A or a Starbucks or for that matter directly across the street from an Old Navy.

“The changes make good sense.”

Related stories

 

Get Our Free E-Mail Newsletter!

Every Sunday we round up the week’s top headlines and preview the upcoming week in the East Cobb News Digest. Click here to sign up, and you’re good to go!

6 thoughts on “Cobb commissioners adopt major changes to sex shop ordinance”

  1. *Correction, Mister not Misses, sorry. Read the last couple sentences of the body too fast. I saw “EastCobbNews she” when it really says “EastCobbNews he”.

  2. Imagine Miss Daniel White being a minimalist government Republican only to find out she’s as totalitarian as communist. Folks like her make me ashamed to be apart of this party.

    Life, liberty, property. Does Tokyo Valentino threaten your life? No. Does Tokyo Valentino take away your freedoms? No. One could make the argument that it hurts property values, but then again, I wouldn’t want to live near Daniel White, thus affecting property value of places around her. No, Tokyo Valentino is not physically damaging your property.

    Instead you choose to violate their life (livelihood), their freedom (to operate a store), and their property (by taking away their physical location). Good job comrade!

    It’s great that folks like Miss White want to kill local jobs, remove tax generating businesses from our county, and drive more local consumption to companies like Amazon.

    Don’t even get me started on the “Think of the Children” argument. Unless you’re constantly brainwashing your kid, your attempts to hide the realities of life will only increase the chances your children will go down the path you don’t want.

    My take anyway.

    • If you made sense that would be awesome.

      One “could make the argument that it affects property values” – uh yeah – there are over 40 cases in the 30 page document well researched by the county. Read much? Or do you just like pictures?

      “No one violated their life or livelihood” comrade – they just can’t operate at a location next to residential property or schools.

      It’s also great that you think only a woman could be opposed to this you misogynist? Caveman much?

      Oh and don’t get me started on hiding kids from the realities of life, trolls like you without our facts only increase the chances of them running into people with a different point of view that can’t articulate it well enough and could never be open to another point of view.

      My take anyway.

      • > If you made sense that would be awesome.

        Where do I not make sense? I’ll be happy to clarify for you?

        My argument is simple. Live and let live. Imposing your morality under various guises is untruthful. Just be blunt about why you want to ban a sex shop. It’s because it is a sex shop.

        And then don’t call your self a republican. Call yourself an authoritarian.

        > One “could make the argument that it affects property values” – uh yeah – there are over 40 cases in the 30 page document well researched by the county.

        And one could draw the same conclusions from a host of other industries out there. Why draw the line at just sex shops? No one wants to live by gas stations, pawn stores, gunshops, etc. Hell, I could probably come up with a study that churches lower property value just because of the traffic and noise they generate on Sunday.

        > Read much? Or do you just like pictures?

        Well, you know what they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

        All kidding aside. No, I did not read the report, nor do I care too. I have no dog in this fight, other than bemoaning over regulation in the guise of property values when in reality, most of you have panties in a wad over morality issues.

        > they just can’t operate at a location next to residential property or schools.

        And next thing you know, you can’t drive buy gasoline cars (as the environmentalist want), or have a vape shop, or wear brown shoes. Yes, this is a slippery slope argument, but why draw the line at over regulation of sex shops?

        > It’s also great that you think only a woman could be opposed to this you misogynist? Caveman much?

        If you’re talking about me “miss gendering” Mr. Daniels, it was an honest mistake, rectified by the correct I posted 30 minutes before your reply.

        The sign is misogynistic, and you could get away with regulation of it based on lewdness. But the business itself… if you think only men are interested in that sort of thing, you’re the one living under a rock.

        > Oh and don’t get me started on hiding kids from the realities of life

        Funny enough, I used to teach kids for a spell before I went into the corporate world. You wouldn’t believe how vulgar they are. And resentful baptist kids were the worst.

        > trolls like you without our facts only increase the chances of them running into people with a different point of view that can’t articulate it well enough and could never be open to another point of view.

        Am I a Troll? Maybe in this respect, yes. My post was to provoke a reaction.

        Did I articulation of my view points? I think I did quite well. You just might be too stupid to understand it. I said it a few times. Life, liberty, physical property (NOT PROPERTY VALUE). If it doesn’t violate your life, liberty, or physical property. Live and let live. It’s called Libertarianism.

        Why is Property Value not Physical Property? Because Property Value is speculative value. The government should not be protecting your speculative investments through regulation. The government should protect your property from physical harm, such as air pollution from other properties. But backstopping the value of your property from just the existence of sex shop is as wrong as corporate-socialist bailouts of the banks, big businesses the last few decades. Protection of speculative value (in this case, Property Value) of some, at the cost of others.

        > could never be open to another point of view.

        I already understand your view. Sex shops hurt property values. If you own property around it, you’ll be quite pissed and lobby your government critter to fix it. Those that don’t own property near it are against it purely on morality grounds. Government critters will act against it, as more people are outraged than who would be directly affected by it. It’s a non-issue for the rest of the voting population. Win-Win for everyone up in arms.

        Me on all of this? Over regulation makes you a RINO. But alas, the party of Goldwater probably left me long ago.

        Cheers.

    • If you made sense that would be awesome.

      One “could make the argument that it affects property values” – uh yeah – there are over 40 cases in the 30 page document well researched by the county. Read much? Or do you just like pictures?

      “No one violated their life or livelihood” comrade – they just can’t operate at a location next to residential property or schools.

      It’s also great that you think only a woman could be opposed to this you misogynist? Caveman much?

      Oh and don’t get me started on hiding kids from the realities of life, trolls like you without our facts only increase the chances of them running into people with a different point of view that can’t articulate it well enough and could never be open to another point of view.

      My take anyway.

Comments are closed.