Laserfiche WebLink
EEC- <br />0 -1990 17:22 FROM SWEENEY R BORER <br />Mr. Joel R. Hanson <br />December 20, 1990 <br />Page Three <br />TO LITTLE-CANADA P.n.: <br />upheld in ity of St. Paul vs. Carlone, 419 N.W. 2d 129 (Minn. <br />at 1988), does not indicate that a similar restriction would be <br />permissible given other land use considerations within Little <br />Canada. <br />The proposed ordinance adding Chapter 817, requiring the <br />licensing of adult uses, is consistent with a municipality's <br />general authority to license activities within its jurisdiction. <br />We do not believe that any of the requirements contained in the <br />licensing ordinance unduly restrict First Amendment rights, and <br />believe the ordinance would survive constitutional scrutiny. <br />Please note that Section 817.030 (d) of the ordinance, requiring <br />an applicant to provide information related to sex offenses is <br />consistent with case law. Requiring information as to offenses <br />unrelated to the operation of an adult use business would likely <br />be prohibited. Finally, the requirement that all existing <br />businesses be required to conform to the licensing ordinance is <br />appropriate. Retroactive application of the proposed zoning <br />ordinance, however, would likely be invalidated. See Alexander <br />v. City of Minneapolis, supra. <br />If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter <br />further, please advise. <br />PTO:lmg <br />Enclosure <br />Very truly yours, <br />SWEENEY & BORER <br />Paul T. Ostrow <br />Page 75 <br />