| Author |
Message |
    
Carol Flamm Reingold
Citizen
Username: Clflamm
Post Number: 41
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 11:46 pm: | 
|
I read in the local paper that the Township Committee was considering imposing a $250 registration fee for any Massage Therapy businesses in town. This was in reaction to prostitution which was going on in a local business on Springfield. (Undercover cops at work.)
I happen to know that the State is starting a certification and registration for Massage therapy which you can get if you have had a certain amount of education. They do a police background check as a part of the deal.
I asked several TC members about possibly accepting this in lieu of town registration, leaving those who are not state certified to pay the town fee. I was told by Kathy Levanthal that "The issue remains that Maplewood needs to register anyone providing services in town for the safety of the residents. The cost of the registration is to cover the expenses of the registration process."
This leaves me with some questions I will try to get answered. Are they saying that ANYONE providing services needs to register? Accountants, organizers, piano teachers, cleaning people, dog walkers?
What is the breakdown of costs to register people. Are they hiring people to do this? Buying a new computer for the occasion? Why $250?
Anyone have a business that is registered?
If they are saying all services, it seems quite unenforceable and does not do our town a service. On the other hand, it there were a small fee, and a town listing provided and other assistance to the businesses, I could see a listing being desireable on both sides.
This is on the agenda for the next meeting on Tuesday Jan 18th. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 3391
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 9:01 am: |
|
"The issue remains that Maplewood needs to register anyone providing services in town for the safety of the residents. The cost of the registration is to cover the expenses of the registration process."
This is a bad idea Kathy! The ordinance is not going to provide any measurable level of safety for the residents of Maplewood. If anything it may result in collecting a few dollars for the town, but in the end like most new tax schemes, the cost will only be passed on to the consumer.
What will they think of next to tax?
Registering everyone who provides services to the public to stop prostitution is insane. This reminds me of the blind leading the blind, or in this case, it’s more like the tax whores against the sex whores...
Last year we nailed the landscapers, this year any Massage Therapy businesses in town, next year maybe nail and beauty salons, doctors, dentists, lawyers… what business next?
As this topic will be on the agenda for the next meeting of the township committee, on Tuesday Jan 18th, I invite everyone to come down to Here’s 2 the Arts for a FREE cup of coffee and some good conversation as we watch Channel 35 and the bi-monthly activities of our local political leaders.
BTW, Katie Wang from the Star Ledger will be back at the Café again that night with a photographer to continue her story about Maplewood’s politically and sexually active community.  |
SoOrLady
Citizen
Username: Soorlady
Post Number: 1679
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 9:06 am: |
|
"This was in reaction to prostitution which was going on in a local business on Springfield."
Wrong tense there Carol. Sunflower Spa is still in operation. The article that made front page news a while back was from the first bust. The new proprieter still runs an active business.
I know this doesn't address your post.. but I really hate the fact that "everyone" knows it's there.. and no one has shut them down. |
Carol Flamm Reingold
Citizen
Username: Clflamm
Post Number: 43
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 9:21 am: |
|
Yes, I was making the assumption that the business had changed its ways. Wouldn't the proper response be to shut down an illegal business rather than make them pay $250? Is this really going to inhibit their illegal activity? Hey, i know, we're going to start regulation prositution, we can be like the Amsterdam of NJ. |
Bobkat
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7229
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 9:33 am: |
|
This type of business is hard to shut down. You raid the place, make arrests and it opens the next day with a new "staff".
The theroy is that the people who work there will not have the qualifications to be registered.
I can't speak for Kathy or other members of the TC, but I don't think they intend to license everyone who does work here in town. |
SoOrLady
Citizen
Username: Soorlady
Post Number: 1682
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 9:45 am: |
|
"This type of business is hard to shut down. You raid the place, make arrests and it opens the next day with a new "staff"."
Not if pressure is put on the landlord to act responsibly. It's an illegal operation to begin with and they are not only working, but living in this "commercial space". He should have evicted them by now.
|
Carol Flamm Reingold
Citizen
Username: Clflamm
Post Number: 44
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 9:50 am: |
|
I also see how registering would discourage this kind of activity. What's to stop the new owners from just paying the $250 and carrying on? |
Bobkat
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7230
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 10:03 am: |
|
each Masseusse (sp?) has to be registered. I assume their are educational requirements and a background check (police record) is done. |
Carol Flamm Reingold
Citizen
Username: Clflamm
Post Number: 45
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 10:17 am: |
|
I originally asked David Huemer about this issue, pointing out that the State Certification, which is newly underway, is doing police background checks and has education requirements and that the Town registration would be a duplication. He said there would be no background check or educational requirements and implied that it was to make money. Also it is registration of the business, not the individual massage therapists. |
SoOrLady
Citizen
Username: Soorlady
Post Number: 1683
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 10:21 am: |
|
Bobkat - Masseusse is a term for those at the Sun Flower Spa and is considered derogatory by LMTs (Lisenced Massage Therapists). |
Bobkat
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7231
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 10:24 am: |
|
David is in a better position than I amto know what is going on. However, the purpose of the registration, one way or another, is to give the town some control over businesses such as Sunflower Spa. |
Carol Flamm Reingold
Citizen
Username: Clflamm
Post Number: 47
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 10:32 am: |
|
Yes, I'm trying to understand how this proposal is going to do that, and not getting anything told me that makes sense. I am concerned that "innocents", legit massage therapists opening businesses, especially if they are state certified, will be unfairly taxed here, while the businesses that the town is trying to regulate will not be controlled by this sort of measure. It is up to us as citizens to be informed, and offer feedback and suggestions to the TC, not for us to assume the TC has all the answers. |
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 307
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 11:02 am: |
|
He said there would be no background check or educational requirements and implied that it was to make money. Also it is registration of the business, not the individual massage therapists.
Sounds like open season. Anyone can come here, register their business (in the name of making money) without a background check?
Where's Heidi Fleiss?
As far as Sunflower Spa is concerned…
community activists/volunteers should camp outside the Spa with a video camera and start video taping the clients (johns) going in and expose them to the public!
|
Mark Fuhrman
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 1134
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 11:07 am: |
|
Um, you really did not mean to use "expose"?
I am curious, does anyone believe in legalizing prostitution? That would be one way to expand revenue through licensing. |
Brett Weir
Citizen
Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 528
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 11:08 am: |
|
Masseur/Masseuse is a profession that is licensed and regulated by the N.J. State Division of Consumer Affairs, so requiring a local license is a bit redundant (not to mention a financial "double-dip"). But the same type of local regulations are levied on all kinds of service providers, so this one is not so far-fetched. Locally, I guess they think it will distinguish the actual massage professionals from the "professionals who massage". Of course, in Nevada THAT service is licensed and regualted by the state. |
Carol Flamm Reingold
Citizen
Username: Clflamm
Post Number: 48
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 11:22 am: |
|
Actually it is now under the board of nursing. This year that are starting a new "certification" requiring police background check and education. What are some of the other regulations on service providers? |
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 310
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 1:21 pm: |
|
Hmmm,
Maplewood bans the playing of religious music, but yet, allows a prostitution establishment to run right under their nose. 
btw Mark ,
I do mean expose. (just don't let them catch ya!)   |
Mayor McCheese
Citizen
Username: Mayor_mccheese
Post Number: 76
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 1:38 pm: |
|
I didn't realize that this place was still open. I might just have to check it out during my lunch break. You know... for research....so I can post more about it on MOL.... |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 3659
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 7:08 pm: |
|
The people most able to afford the $250 will be those running brothels, methinks. What about the individuals in private practice?
Not a good idea.
Now, legalizing prostitution & collecting a town tax on services.....
that could take care of a few problems! And while we are at it, can't we tax nail salons as well? |
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 4735
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 3:42 pm: |
|
I don't think anything will be accomplished by requiring each massage business in town to pay a registration fee, especially if no kind of background check or periodic inspection is required as part of the registration process.
Businesses such as the Sunflower Spa will probably consider $250 a pretty cheap cost of doing business in our town, especially if the registration serves to legitimatize their business.
Therapeutic massage therapists, who see clients in the client's own home could avoid the $250 fee by listing the official address of their business as being out-of-town and still serve customers in our community.
Legitimate message businesses who see customers on site would likely locate elsewhere, especially if they are operating on a small profit margin. This could end up hurting the town. |
fredprofeta
Citizen
Username: Fredprofeta
Post Number: 79
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Monday, January 17, 2005 - 12:38 am: |
|
There was a thread on the subject of the Sunflower Spa that ran several months ago. At that time, I believe I pointed out that the town had been investigating this establishment and that a criminal conviction had resulted. Based on that conviction and advertising attributable to the Spa, the landlord was approached and eviction proceedings were commenced. I am now informed that the tenant has consented to vacate the premises in March. I am following this matter closely, and if the information I have received proves to be incorrect, additional legal action will be considered. Other investigations are proceeding as well. No more information can be disclosed at this time.
Regarding the registration ordinance also discussed on this thread, the intent is not to raise revenue but rather to assure that only legitimate businesses operate in town. I, for one, have no desire to impose onerous licensing requirements on certified therapists. I would not favor any ordinance that did that. |
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 4740
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, January 17, 2005 - 8:58 am: |
|
Fred:
Does this mean that the registration ordinance if passed will include background check and inspection provisions and that such provisions will be carried out? If not, how will said ordinance assure that only legitimate businesses operate in town? |
fredprofeta
Citizen
Username: Fredprofeta
Post Number: 80
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Monday, January 17, 2005 - 9:19 am: |
|
That's the issue Joan. That's what we're going to discuss. The document which will be before the TC is only a draft to be worked on. It is not being introduced. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page