Editorial: Proposal needs massaging

Wednesday, Oct. 10, 2007 | 7:16 a.m.

Owners of small, independent massage parlors can be very successful in this stress-filled world. But here's the rub: The very nature of their business draws suspicion.

It all gets back to location, location, location.

Few people would ever think twice about the massage parlors inside casinos or country clubs. They are automatically endowed with respectability through association with their landlords.

It is the massage parlors operating on side streets, often with bright signs, that raise suspicion. Here, in many people's minds, massage is just another word for prostitution.

This appears to be how some regulators inside Clark County government feel. The County Commission is scheduled to consider a proposed new ordinance in December, one that would require independent massage parlors to close from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.

Interviewed by Sun reporter Tony Cook, one owner of an independent massage parlor said he did 70 percent of his business between those hours, with his clientele including firefighters, police officers, airport-baggage handlers and casino workers.

We oppose this proposed ordinance. It would subject all independent massage parlors to an unproven assumption, that illegal sexual activity takes place at their businesses.

It is noteworthy that the proposed law targets only the small operations where massage is the primary activity. Large salons and casino-related massage businesses would not be affected.

Parts of the proposed law we do not mind. For example, it would require independent massage parlors to be at least 200 feet from residential properties and 1,000 feet from one another. Those are standard zoning requirements that do not discriminate.

But forcing them all to close during their peak business hours would be wrong. The best way to root out rogue massage parlors is through standard police enforcement , not through a law that could drive honest people out of business.