What once was considered rebellious is now mainstream.
A federal court ruling may have compelled Daytona Beach to relax its ordinances regarding tattoo parlors, but some local officials’ negative attitudes about body art haven’t changed.
In late 2015, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta concluded that because tattooing is a form of artistic expression protected by the First Amendment, the city of Key West could not use zoning to force tattoo parlors to operate in a certain area. Rather than risk a lawsuit it almost surely would lose, Daytona Beach reconsidered its mandate that such businesses operate only in areas zoned for heavy industry and those approved for planned developments — places far outside the tourism hot spots where most tattoo artists would prefer to set up shop.
After the city last April wisely liberalized its restrictions on tattoo parlors, the change quickly bore fruit. The News-Journal’s Eileen Zaffiro-Kean reports that the Nines Parlor opened in June on Beville Road, and in October Victory Tattoo gained approval to open a parlor and museum on Main Street.
However, city officials have been more suspect about allowing Robert Mansour to open a tattoo shop on the second floor of the building that houses the Ivory Kitchen Thai Restaurant on Beach Street. The proposal passed the Historic Preservation Board, Downtown Redevelopment Board and Planning Board, but not without opposition from some members. At the Dec. 6 City Commission meeting, commissioners Ruth Trager and Rob Gilliland expressed skepticism about the proposal.
(READ: Daytona tattoo shop vote delayed)
Trager said it wasn’t so much Mansour’s high-end operation that concerned her as it was changing the rules to allow someone else to open a tattoo shop that could be “less than desirable.” Gilliland said he thinks “it’s unlikely” he would support the rezoning because he doesn’t “see any public purpose or good” in it.
That’s getting pretty subjective, and putting elected officials in the position of picking business winners and losers. It’s not the government’s job to determine if a proposed business has a “public purpose”; that should be left to consumers to decide. If it’s not selling a good or service that a lot of people want, it’s not going to matter what city commissioners think of it, because it won’t be in business for long.
Besides, given the fact that Beach Street already has a fair number of funky shops and restaurants, a tattoo parlor would seem to be a natural fit.
(READ: Daytona panel discusses tattoo parlor rules, locations)
For some officials tattoo parlors still carry a stigma, despite the fact that their ink can be seen on a broad cross-section of the public. The days of tattoos being the stuff of convicts, punk rockers and sailors are long gone. Today you find body art openly displayed by Millennials and Generation Xers, male and female, even baby boomers. They sport everything from small, simple images on ankles to elaborate “sleeves” on arms.
What once was considered rebellious is now mainstream; it has gone from being a subculture to part of pop culture.
The issue shouldn’t be aesthetics, but safety. So long as a tattoo artist follows the rules that protect the public’s health, a parlor should be treated like a nail salon.
When the City Commission meets Wednesday night, commissioners should put aside personal opinions about tattoo parlors and consider them as they would any other business that meets the applicable standards.