Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2/(p ..', I <br />. '. <br />. <br /> <br />I. Four generally-accepted principles of law _ (I <br /> <br />A. Activities occurring in an adult entertainment business I <br />are protected by the First Amendment and its provision <br />for freedom of speech. <br />B. A city must allow some reasonable opportunity for adult <br />businesses to operate. I <br />C. Adverse impacts (known in the trade as "adverse secondary <br />effects") resulting from the adult business provide a <br />basis for zoning regulations. The most common adverse I <br />secondary effects are increases in criminal activity and <br />decreases in property values. <br />D. A city can restrict the location of adult entertainment <br />businesses if the city's purpose is to minimize those I <br />adverse secondary effects. Those restrictions can <br />address the location of adult entertainment businesses <br />with respect to other adult entertainment uses and I <br />special uses (such as churches, schools, and libraries). <br /> <br /> <br />II. Two Really Important U.S. Supreme Court Cases I <br /> <br />A. Youna v. American Mini Theatres. Inc., 427 U.S. 50 . <br />(1976). (I <br /> <br />1. Detroi t enacted an "anti-skid row" ordinance ': <br />designed to prevent the concentration of adult I <br />entertainment businesses in any area of the city. <br />Detroit relied upon a study which found that the <br />concentration of these businesses "tends to attract <br />an undesirable guantity and quality of transients, I <br />adversely affects property values, causes an <br />increase in crime, especially prostitution, and <br />encourage residents and businesses to move else- . <br />where." The ordinance required a 1,000 foot <br />separation between adult entertainment businesses <br />and a 500 foot separation between those businesses <br />and residential areas. . <br />2., The Court, i!l a, plurality de<::ision, upheld the <br />ordinance's constitutionality on the basis that <br />it's purpose was the avoidance of "adverse I <br />secondary effects" rather than the suppression of <br />offensive speech. <br />3. The plurality decision noted that the ordinance was I <br />viewpoint neutral and addressed speech which was <br />"on the border line between pornography and <br />artistic expression" and thus entitled to less <br />protection than political speech. It <br /> <br />2 ~I <br />I <br />