|
ADDENDUM TO .APPEAL OF PL:VNVTNG CON/ SSION ACTIOi f
<br /> January 29th, 1996
<br /> .After review of State and Federal law, the legal representation and consultation for Main Stage
<br /> Entertainment, Inc., consisting of. Ron Stein, Attorney at Law, Stockton; Mark C. Leas, Attorney at
<br /> Law, Sacramento; and Donald Feinberg, Attorney at Law, Los Angeles; finds that there are no Federal
<br /> or State laws that prohibit us from opening an adult cabaret, featuring live nude dancing.
<br /> Constitutional Law U.S.C.A. Constitutional Amendment I and U.S. Supreme Court rulings will
<br /> show a clear line of consistent, and unquestioned decisions protecting First Amendment Rights in this
<br /> area. We draw your attention first to California State Legislation enacted in 1994, Government Code
<br /> Section 6580. (g) (1), which will void the San Joaquin County Zoning Ordinance, as it pertains to adult
<br /> entertament businesses. We see the State empowering Counties and Cities to regulate sexually
<br /> oriinented businesses by ordinance. This regulation must be pursuant to a content-neutral Zoning
<br /> Ordinance based on narrow, objective, and definite standards. The Adult Entertainment Zonng
<br /> Ordinance and Site Approval process in San Joaquin County is vague, ambiguous, and is
<br /> unconstitutional, as an improper prior restraint on First Amendment Rights.
<br /> In Amico v. New Castle, 571 F. Supp. 160 (D Del 1983); Dease v. City of Anaheim 826 F. Supp.
<br /> 336 (C.D. Cat. 1993); and City of Imperial Beach v. Palm Avenue Books, Inc., App., 171 Cal. Rptr.
<br /> 197, the same city and county zoning ordinances and approval criteria are unconstitutionally vague,
<br /> overbroad, and a prior restraint against First Amendment protected activity, in that, necessity for
<br /> issuance of permit that proposed use contribute to "general well-being" and not be "detrimental" to
<br /> health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in vicinity or injurious to property or
<br /> improvements in vicinity, set up a subjective standard incapable of precise objective measurement, and
<br /> provision that city or county "may" grant site approval conferred unlimited authority to deny any
<br /> application for adult entertainment businesses, even if application for approval met all conditions of
<br /> sections. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 1.
<br /> San Joaquin County Site Approval criteria, which we note, must make the same findings as that
<br /> of an application for a use permit, allows the San Joaquin County Planning Commission and Board of
<br /> Supervisors to decide, without any guidance (Findings 44 and 45, San Joaquin County, Community
<br /> Development Department), what will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety, or
<br /> welfare; be injurious to the property or improvements of adjacent properties, and is compatible with
<br /> adjoining land uses.
<br /> It would be impossible for any county to make these determinations on an objective standard,
<br /> because they are subjective in nature Therefore, the requirements for findings ;4 and t5 are
<br /> unconstitutionally vague, and violates California Government Code Section 65850 (g) (1), because they
<br /> are not narrow, objective, and definite standards.
<br /> In a review of City of Renton v. Plavtime Theaters, 475 U.S. 41, and Young v. American Mini
<br /> Theaters, Inc., 427 U.S. 50, we see the U.S. Supreme Court granting the right of Cities and Counties to
<br /> Ie--islate by a content-neutral zoning ordinance, the time, place, and manner of operation of adult
<br /> entertainment businesses. We see a standard in local government legislation that does not unreasonably
<br /> limit alternative avenues of communication. The San Joaquin County ordinance only directs us to locate
<br /> in a designated commercial zone. with no surrounding footage requirements.
<br /> Since the zoning ordinance, pertaining to Site Approval, is in violation of the protection of free
<br /> speech, guaranteed by the tinted States Constitution and the State of California Constitution, and is
<br /> vague, overbroad, and also is in violation of California Government Code Section 65850 (g) (1), it would
<br /> be improper to utilize the San Joaquin County Zoning Ordinance to deny our proposed use in the
<br /> designated location. Therefore, since no Federal, State or County law can be applied to prchibit our
<br /> proposed use at the designated location, we urge you to issue the site approval immediately.
<br /> Sincerelv,
<br /> -5- Main Stage Entertainment, Inc.
<br />
|