§ 5.09.010. Rationale and findings  


Latest version.
  • A. Purpose. It is the purpose of this chapter to regulate sexually oriented businesses in order to promote the health, safety, moral and general welfare of the citizens of the city, and to establish reasonable and uniform regulations to prevent the deleterious secondary effects of sexually oriented businesses within the city. The provisions of this chapter have neither the purpose nor effect of imposing a limitation or restriction on the content or reasonable access to any communicative materials, including sexually oriented materials. Similarly, it is neither the intent nor effect of this chapter to restrict or deny access by adults to sexually oriented materials protected by the First Amendment, or to deny access by the distributors and exhibitors of sexually oriented entertainment to their intended market. Neither is it the intent nor effect of this chapter to condone or legitimize the distribution of obscene material.

    B. Findings and Rationale. Based on evidence of the adverse secondary effects of adult uses presented in hearings and in reports made available to the city council, and on findings, interpretations, and narrowing constructions incorporated in the cases of City of Littleton v. Z.J. Gifts D-4, L.L.C., 541 U.S. 774 (2004); City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc., 535 U.S. 425 (2002); City of Erie v. Pap's A.M., 529 U.S. 277 (2000); City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U.S. 41 (1986); Young v. American Mini Theatres, 427 U.S. 50 (1976); Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 501 U.S. 560 (1991); California v. LaRue, 409 U.S. 109 (1972); and Fantasy Ranch, Inc. v. City of Arlington, No. 04-11337, 2006 WL 2147559 (5th Cir. 2006); N.W. Enters. v. City of Houston, 352 F.3d 162 (5th Cir. 2003); Baby Dolls Topless Saloons, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 295 F.3d 471 (5th Cir. 2002); BGHA, LLC v. City of Universal City, 210 F. Supp. 2d (W.D. Tex. 2002), aff'd 340 F.3d 295 (5th Cir. 2003); LLEH, Inc. v. Wichita County, 289 F.3d 358 (5th Cir. 2002); Hang On, Inc. v. City of Arlington, 65 F.3d 1248 (5th Cir. 1995); Woodall v. City of El Paso, 49 F.3d 1120 (5th Cir. 1995); J&B Entertainment, Inc. v. City of Jackson, 152 F.3d 362 (5th Cir. 1998); SDJ, Inc. v. City of Houston, 837 F.2d 1268 (5th Cir. 1988); TK's Video, Inc. v. Denton County, 24 F.3d 705 (5th Cir. 1994); Heideman v. South Salt Lake City, 342 F.3d 1182 (10th Cir. 2003); Lady J. Lingerie, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 973 F. Supp. 1428 (M.D. Fla. 1997), aff'd 176 F.3d 1358 (11th Cir. 1999); Ctr for Fair Public Policy v. Maricopa County, 336 F.3d 1152 (9th Cir. 2003); World Wide Video of Washington, Inc. v. City of Spokane, 368 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2004); Reliable Consultants, Inc. v. City of Kennedale, Case No. 4:05-CV-166-A (N.D. Tex., May 16, 2005); Sensations, Inc. v. City of Grand Rapids, 2006 WL 2504388 (W.D. Mich., Aug. 28, 2006); Gammoh v. City of La Habra, 395 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2005); Ben's Bar, Inc. v. Village of Somerset, 316 F.3d 702 (7th Cir. 2003);

    And based upon reports concerning secondary effects occurring in and around sexually oriented businesses, including, but not limited to, Austin, Texas — 1986; Indianapolis, Indiana — 1984; Garden Cove, California — 1991; Houston, Texas — 1983; Phoenix, Arizona — 1979, 1995-98; Chattanooga, Tennessee — 1999-2003; Minneapolis, Minnesota — 1980; Los Angeles, California — 1977; Whittier, California — 1978; Spokane, Washington — 2001; St. Cloud, Minnesota — 1994; Littleton, Colorado — 2004; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma — 1986; Dallas, Texas — 1997, 2004; Greensboro, North Carolina —2003; Kennedale, Texas — 2005; Effingham, Illinois — 2005; Amarillo, Texas — 1977; El Paso, Texas — 1986; New York, New York Times Square — 1994; and the Report of the Attorney General's Working Group on the Regulation of Sexually Oriented Businesses (June 6, 1989, State of Minnesota);

    The city council finds:

    1. Sexually oriented businesses, as a category of commercial uses, are associated with a wide variety of adverse secondary effects including, but not limited to, personal and property crimes, prostitution, potential spread of disease, lewdness, public indecency, obscenity, illicit drug use and drug trafficking, negative impacts on surrounding properties, urban blight, litter and sexual assault and exploitation;

    2. Sexually oriented businesses should be separated from sensitive land uses to minimize the impact of their secondary effects upon such uses, and should be separated from other sexually oriented businesses, to minimize the secondary effects associated with such uses and to prevent an unnecessary concentration of sexually oriented businesses in one area;

    3. Each of the foregoing negative secondary effects constitutes a harm, which the city has a substantial government interest in preventing and/or abating. This substantial government interest in preventing secondary effects, which is the city's rationale for this chapter, exists independent of any comparative analysis between sexually oriented and non-sexually oriented businesses. Additionally, the city's interests in regulating sexually oriented businesses extend to preventing future secondary effects of either current or future sexually oriented businesses that may locate in the city. The city finds that the cases and documentation relied on in this chapter are reasonably believed to be relevant to said secondary effects.

(Ord. No. 17691, § 1, 12-6-2011, eff. 2-29-2012)