Hartford Advocate 4/12

http://www.ctnow.com/custom/nmm/hartfordadvocate/hce-hta-0412-ht16nc6berlinporn16.artapr12,0,2706367.story

Porn Fight

Berlin’s Fight Against Adult Store Vip Gets Help From The Attorney General. Should Protecting Property Values Trump Free Speech?

By Adam Bulger

April 12 2007

The fight by Berlin residents against a Berlin Turnpike Very Intimate Pleasures adult entertainment center isn’t the only clash between homeowners and adult business, it’s just the closest. Communities across America have fought and continue to fight encroaching sexually oriented businesses so much that a template for such fights has been set.

Berlin’s fight both follows the script and rewrites it.

Typically, the two sides disagree over the terms of the argument: For the adult business proponents, the issue at hand is free speech. Home and business owners argue the larger issue is quality of life issues, specifically purported negative secondary effects that occur around adult businesses.

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s March 19 Amicus Curiae (friend of the court) brief filing on behalf of Berlin spells out concerns about negative secondary effects of such businesses, ranging from discarded sexually oriented material on neighboring properties to safety concerns.

Citizens opposed to the project have expressed concerns about secondary effects as well.

“Our concerns are about the negative secondary effects that have been cited in many studies,” said Laura Michaud, a Berlin resident and the proprietor of webpage novip.wordpress.com. “There may not be prostitution in the parking lot, for example. But our property values are definitely going to be affected by this. … We have the right to protect our property values.”

Adam Cohen of No Porn Northampton, a citizen action group which successfully lobbied to change zoning laws governing adult businesses in Northampton, Mass. last year, said that the argument about negative secondary effects has proven to be an effective tool for fighting adult businesses.

“Certainly, making secondary effects arguments and talking about zoning seems to be one of the leading successful approaches that the courts are comfortable with, and doesn’t seem to impose too much of a debt in the first amendment,” Cohen said.

Clyde DeWitt, a Los Angeles based attorney who specializes in adult business-related First Amendment issues, said that arguments about secondary effects are specious, and tend to hide an anti-free speech agenda.

“The fact of the matter is that there’s a group of right wing Christians who think adult entertainment is a sin and they’re trying to do everything they can to get rid of it,” DeWitt said. “This seems to work for them because you can’t say you’re not allowed to have this because that would be the regulation of a content of speech. Whether they like it or not, Playboy is speech and it’s protected, just like their churches are.”

Michaud, of Berlin, describes herself as politically liberal (Cohen said he is a Buddhist), and said that she recognizes that free speech issues apply to the VIP store, but feels that property rights supersede them.

“There’s a clash of rights here, and I think public safety should come before sexual expression,” Michaud said.

One aspect of the battle that may be unique is the presence of the state, in the form of Attorney General Blumenthal, in the legal proceedings.

“My impression is that it’s generally been at the municipal level where these things have taken place,” Adam Cohen said.

Blumenthal’s presence isn’t appreciated by VIP management.

“We were surprised because [Blumenthal] had taken the position of not getting involved, then a month later flipped over and got involved,” VIP district manager Gary Porter said. “I’ve read a lot of stuff, and basically the consensus is he’s sticking his nose in a lot of places he shouldn’t be.” ●

E-mail editor@hartfordadvocate.com

Copyright © 2007, Hartford Advocate