NEW AFFAIR LOUNGE Lawyer: Nightclub should be fined for each day it opens

The lawyer says the city has failed to make the bar's operation legal.
YOUNGSTOWN -- The New Affair Lounge is in violation of a city zoning ordinance and should be fined each day it continues operating, says a lawyer whose client wants the business to be closed.
Atty. Randi A. Barnabee of Bedford represents James Ludt of Youngstown, who has scrawled messages on his East Midlothian Boulevard building attacking the New Affair, which is next door.
In a letter sent this week to William D'Avignon, deputy director of planning, city Prosecutor Dionne Almasy and city council, Barnabee said the New Affair is operating as a "go-go bar," which falls under the definition of a burlesque theater or adult-oriented business.
The zoning ordinance prevents adult-oriented businesses from operating within 500 feet of places such as churches, schools, parks and homes.
Barnabee said a proposal was made to council in August to amend the zoning ordinance to reduce the 500-foot minimum distance requirement to 300 feet. Council has yet to approve that amendment, she wrote.
She adds the New Affair is licensed only as a nightclub, but the establishment bills itself as "presenting Youngstown's best exotic dancers."
The letter says D'Avignon, as the city's zoning enforcement representative, should be aware that the New Affair is operating in violation of the city ordinance for which no waiver is available, and the city has failed to make the bar's current operation legal.
She has made a request on Ludt's behalf to D'Avignon to "remedy the gross and flagrant ongoing violations" of the zoning ordinance being committed by the New Affair.
$100 fine
Violation of the ordinance is a misdemeanor, which carries a minimum fine of $100 for each separate offense.
Barnabee wants D'Avignon to cite the bar that amount for each day it has operated at least since Aug. 14. That is the day D'Avignon was quoted in The Vindicator as saying the New Affair was essentially operating as an adult-oriented business and was not in compliance with the 500-foot distance.
Almasy said Wednesday she has received Barnabee's correspondence but hasn't had a chance to look it over and weigh the merits of the argument. D'Avignon was unavailable to comment.
A municipal court judge agreed earlier this month that Ludt's scrawled messages attacking the bar are constitutionally protected free speech.
Magistrate Anthony Sertick dismissed three charges of violating the city's anti-graffiti ordinance. Police issued the citations Oct. 25, 26 and 27.
Barnabee argued that the ordinance, as applied to Ludt, restricts his constitutional right of free speech. Almasy essentially agreed with the argument.
Barnabee said it's clear that Ludt had his own permission to paint messages on his own building. Police reports show the business as 680 Auto Sales.
Council criticized Almasy for not fighting harder to have the messages removed, and said it wanted to meet with the prosecutor.
Almasy said she has not been contacted by council, but would be happy to meet with the lawmakers and discuss the matter.