« Environment - Wind turbines in the news | Main | Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 6 NFP) »

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Ind. Gov't. - "Adult businesses back on agenda" for New Haven

Litigation involving the City of New Haven and Flying J has been the subject of a number of ILB entries involving both state and federal court, the most entry being this one from August 31, 2009 - COA opinion.

Today Amanda Iacone reports in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette in a long story that begins:

NEW HAVEN – New Haven officials continued efforts Tuesday to restrict and control adult entertainment businesses.

The City Council introduced two ordinances that would designate which businesses must apply for a city permit to operate. The council referred a third ordinance, which would determine which zoning districts such businesses would be allowed in, to the city’s plan commission. And the council tabled a fourth ordinance that deals with massage-related businesses.

City attorneys and officials have been working with a Tennessee attorney who specializes in writing and defending these types of ordinances, City Attorney David Van Gilder said.

The idea is not to restrict First Amendment rights, he said.

The proposed ordinances cite federal case law to support the city’s rationale for regulating such businesses. The proposed application and renewal fees are set low so that opening an adult bookstore or strip club isn’t cost-prohibitive or too restrictive, which could be seen as a violation of constitutional rights, Van Gilder said.

In general, the content of the sexually oriented business ordinances varies little from past versions that have been presented to the council. It limits the hours of operation, defines what types of business fall under the ordinance, and outlines the application and appeal process.

A separate zoning ordinance change would limit such businesses to industrially zoned areas of the city. New Haven provides a number of areas zoned industrial, which should give any would-be business owners some flexibility, Van Gilder said.

The ordinance would also prevent such locales from opening within 1,000 feet of a school, church, park or residential property.

The proposal also calls for amending an existing city law that regulates massage parlors.

Re the "Tennessee attorney", this ILB entry from July 9, 2006 quoted a story from the Evansville C&P headed "County getting lesson in laws: Efforts target adult business" that included the following:
Increasingly, small, rural counties that border major interstates are finding themselves home to adult-oriented businesses.

Spencer County officials hired a Tennessee attorney to advise them on how to shut down the Love Boutique.

Scott Bergthold of Chattanooga has built a national reputation for helping small communities keep out adult entertainment businesses. He told them the local case is part of a "very large trend" that's been going on in rural counties around the country for a good part of the past decade.

"They (rural officials) never thought they'd have the problem and now the wolf is at the door," he said. "But I have worked for a lot of counties like Spencer County, and they all share the commonality of bordering an interstate."

Posted by Marcia Oddi on November 25, 2009 08:50 AM
Posted to Indiana Government