Condemning bar inappropriate for planners

Published 12:00 am Wednesday, April 7, 1999

The philosopher Barney Fife once said, &uot;Nip it, nip it, nip it in the bud.

Wednesday, April 7, 1999

The philosopher Barney Fife once said, &uot;Nip it, nip it, nip it in the bud.&uot;

Email newsletter signup

It’s a doctrine echoed throughout Albert Lea in recent months and likely to be repeated at an upcoming planning commission meeting.

On March 25, the city’s planning commission will discuss a report stating &uot;the unregulated location and development of sexually oriented businesses within the city of Albert Lea is detrimental to the community.&uot;

The committee responsible for the report links a 27-year history of sexually oriented business near the 300 and 400 blocks of South Broadway Avenue and the current lack of a theater, restaurant and other &uot;retail and service businesses.&uot;

Yet, the report only offers sketchy evidence that the unnamed business – clearly the Aragon Bar – is at fault.

City Planner Bob Graham said the committee’s findings are based on land-use history. That’s information obtained by looking at city documents and standing buildings. Business owners, current and former, haven’t been asked why the area has changed.

After months of study, the committee reports that customer-based businesses in the area have dried up.

Has anyone told Midwest Antiques this?

One regular antique shop customer was asked if he thought business suffered from the proximity to the Aragon. He stated, &uot;It’s full of little old ladies all the time.&uot;

That seems to fly in the face of the claim that businesses in the area are &uot;less female consumer oriented.&uot;

Of course, the committee could be talking about the auto repair shop, lawyers office, abstract company, bank business offices or computer sales and service business. Maybe the conservative members of the committee feel women shouldn’t bother with technical and business matters and stick to shopping in jewelry and gift stores.

But, maybe they the committee has a point. Maybe nearly three decades of adult entertainment scared away the restaurants, the theaters and gift shops.

Of course, during the same period there are two other entities that could be blamed, or at least examined.

The report’s land-use history dates back to 1972, about the same time the Carnegie Library became the Albert Lea Senior Center. Wouldn’t it be as easy to blame our older citizens.

Truly, the same parallels exist, but using them would make the findings just as wrong.

On the other hand, maybe the downfall actually started in 1975. After all, that’s when the county’s law enforcement center moved into the neighborhood.

Maybe business owners fled fearing police prosecution for improper parking.

There are several scapegoats that could be named, but the Aragon is the easiest target.

Still, if one sexually oriented business is to blame for the downfall of the block, wouldn’t it be expected to see the same downfall in connection with other businesses dealing in similar adult products.

When asked about Video Update’s rental of adult videos, Bob Graham declined to comment, saying he doesn’t rent videos and the business would have to decide if it would seek a license as a sexually oriented business.

Yet, committee members discussed Video Update as one of the city’s current businesses dealing with sexually oriented material.

So, why not consider Video Update as a determent to it’s neighborhood?

Obviously the businesses surrounding it are falling to pieces. Just ask owners of Ben’s Floral and Frame Designs, Lakeside Cafe and Creamery, Cafourek and Associates and Quizno’s.

Wait! Those are new businesses doing well near an existing, unregulated business dealing, in part, with sexually oriented materials.

I guess that wouldn’t support the point the committee was trying to make.

How about Northbridge Mall’s Family Fun Center? Committee members have reported the store sells a few sexually oriented objects.

Does it fit the model of destroying all businesses in it’s block?

Just ask the owners of the expanded theater or the now full food court.

No, I think the committee is right to stick to the topic at hand – the 300 and 400 block of South Broadway Avenue.

They also likely made a calculated move in not looking at what else might have caused the downfall of that section of downtown. That would have been a waste of time.

Why remind people that there was a national trend for shoppers – and businesses – to migrate to malls and the edges of cities in recent decades? That would merely cloud the issue.

Instead, it’s important to talk about what happened to downtown Albert Lea and find the cause that best fit’s the predetermined findings.

But, the committee doesn’t stop there. They discussed studies of major metropolitan cities and drew conclusions on public safety instead of listening to our own law enforcement personnel.

At one committee meeting, members were reportedly told the Aragon doesn’t contribute any more to the city’s crime level than any other drinking establishment.

Yet, the committee’s report states, &uot;Sexually Oriented Businesses do effect the behavior of users of these businesses and products resulting in an increase in crime.&uot;

The Albert Lea Police Department, however, says this is not documented in the case of the Aragon.

Maybe the report is referring to the other sexually oriented businesses in the city.

More likely, the committee is referring to businesses in studies cited in their report. Studies of cities like Phoenix, Ariz.; Los Angeles, Calif.; Seattle, Wash. and Minneapolis.

Is that a fair comparison?

Admittedly, I’m no expert in planning a city, but it seems to me that blaming one business for a two-block downfall is like blaming an individual, a committee or even a City Council for all the city’s business woes.

I’m not trying to defend the business’ activities, rather I’m questioning the practice. The end does not justify the means.

What comes next? Will an anti-gambling movement begin trying to draw lines to connect bingo, pull tabs and the lottery with Albert Lea’s lack of housing?

The city and it’s committees can’t be allowed to draw conclusions based on minimal facts.

Regardless of motivation, it’s simply wrong.

That attitude is what truly needs to be nipped in the bud.