Amarillo council votes to repeal massage business ordinance - Amarillo Globe-News

[massage]

The Amarillo City Council unanimously repealed its new ordinance on massage establishments on Tuesday after business owners and massage therapists raised concerns.

Passed last October, the ordinance was scheduled to go into effect March 1, but after pushbacks from massage therapists and business owners, the city had to rethink the ordinance. At issue were privacy concerns and licensed massage therapists being lumped in with establishments that were performing other services, including potentially illegal ones.

One of the significant reasons for the new ordinance was to update outdated wording and to battle human trafficking, which has become synonymous with the illicit massage business. Under the new system, workers would have to be licensed by the state, and establishments would be subject to surprise inspections. At a February meeting of the council, licensed massage therapists filled the chamber, and many addressed the council in public comment.

Among the arguments was that the state already had laws in place to make prostitution and human trafficking illegal. Adding requirements on top of what the state requires was also an issue for many present at the meeting, who said it would significantly affect their business practices.

Following the meeting, Donny Hooper, the Amarillo Managing Director of Public Works, discussed the city's next steps.

“We took council’s direction, and we went back and met with a group of licensed massage therapists that work in Amarillo and had a very productive meeting with them,” Hooper said. "We learned a lot about what they do for a living and the requirements of what it takes to become a licensed massage therapist. From that meeting, we decided it would be best to repeal the ordinance we put before the public and start over from scratch."

Hooper emphasized that the ordinance's goal was not to go after licensed massage therapists, but to eliminate illegal massage establishments and protect those who are actually licensed and doing good work in Amarillo.


As for what is next, Hooper says that the city will review the occupational code to determine what can be enforced.

“We know that there are things, but they are mostly regulatory,” Hooper said. “We also have another side that we will work with our enforcement and legal department to decide what can be moving forward, regarding the illegal activity or criminal aspect of these establishments.”

Moving forward, a committee of subject matter experts is being proposed to look at existing law and to see if any new ordinances need to be created.

“We need to evaluate all that, so we can do a better job of pushing something forward next time that protects those licensed therapists but goes after the ones involved in criminal activities,” Hooper added.

With the conversations with licensed therapists, Hooper said there is a willingness to name places they suspect are not operating legally.

“How we investigate that is a whole other piece of what we are talking to the community and getting a committee together to determine our next steps,” he said. "You cannot just walk in somewhere, behind closed doors, and start asking questions. You have to have some legal reasons and means to do that.”

According to Hooper, the timeline to produce a direction or new ordinance is within the next month to bring it back to the council.

Tuesday's meeting also discussed the formation of a committee to propose possible city charter changes. The voters must approve any changes to the city charter. City Secretary Stephanie Coggins informed council members that changes would have to be made by Aug. 19 to be placed on the November ballot.

Among the changes to the charter could be staggering or increasing council elections and clearer guidance on the role of the city manager. Councilmember Josh Craft opposed the idea, and a city manager search is currently underway.

Councilmembers Tom Scherlen and Les Simpson were adamant about moving forward, stating that this was something that clearly needed to be addressed and that putting it off would not be in the city's best interest.

Adblock test (Why?)