Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sexually Oriented Business Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rosenberg council finds proposed "Hidden Pleasures" meets sexually oriented business definition; owner must apply for permit
Summary
The council concluded, by 4-3 vote, that a proposed adult novelty shop called Hidden Pleasures meets the city's sexually oriented business (SOB) definition and directed the owner to apply for the SOB permit; council members and staff urged the applicant to consult an attorney on next steps.
Rosenberg City Council on May 6 concluded the proposed retail business Hidden Pleasures meets the city27s definition of a sexually oriented business (SOB) and advised the owner to file the permit application required by city ordinance.
Council decision: After discussion and public comment, councilmembers voted 4-3 that the proposed operation falls within the city27s SOB definition. Council members citing the proposed merchandise mix and promotional material said the business27s primary character is consistent with the SOB statute; dissenting members said the owner27s claim that sexually oriented merchandise would occupy a small share of the floor space merited further verification.
Owner27s position: Daniel Bowling, who told council he intended Hidden Pleasures to be a retail shop focused on wellness and lingerie, said the proposed sexually oriented merchandise would represent a small portion of his inventory. Bowling argued the classification was “arbitrary” and “discriminatory” against small retailers that sell similar items in mainstream stores such as pharmacies or big-box retailers.
Staff account and legal framework: City staff and the police chief said Bowling had been advised on multiple occasions to submit an SOB application and that the city27s ordinance (chapter 16, article 7) and the Texas statutory framework define SOBs to include commercial enterprises whose primary business is offering devices or items intended to provide sexual stimulation or gratification. City staff noted that applying for an SOB permit triggers a formal review; by statute and city ordinance the label is consequential and, if denied, can affect the business27s ability to operate under that classification.
Addresses and logistics: The owner said he had been negotiating a relocation from 2111 Avenue G, Suite 110 (initial location) and was discussing a new location at 3302 Avenue I. Staff confirmed the landlord offered a refund for the first location. Council and staff emphasized that the applicant must complete the formal permitting process and that legal counsel should be used if the applicant wishes to contest any permit determination.
Next steps: The owner was told to file the SOB application and to consult the city police department and city attorney as part of the permit review process. Council members said they supported the chief27s authority to enforce the ordinance and suggested the applicant pursue legal review if he wished to appeal any administrative determination.
