Laserfiche WebLink
-2- <br /> recommendation of the City Attorney, made in his memorandum of <br /> October 17th, 1980 , that video sales and rentals should become a <br /> • permitted conditional use under the Zoning Ordinance with conditions <br /> dealing with the sale of obscene material attached to the use. <br /> Mr. Berg told Mrs . Makowske a conditional, rather. than a permitted, <br /> use will give the City more leverage to control the use. Mrs. <br /> Makowske wondered if the video store might not question whether they <br /> are being discriminated against if their use is different than a <br /> garment shop in the same commercial area. <br /> The Administrative Assistant .told Mr. Sopcinski the City does not <br /> now have a law dealing with obscene materials but could develop an <br /> ordinance dealing with that aspect of commercial use as suggested <br /> by Mr. Soth. The Planning Commission would be involved in any such <br /> development if it pertains to land use. However, he added, the City <br /> ordinance would .probably have no more effect on this type of operation <br /> than the state statutes as had also been pointed out in the legal <br /> assessment by the City Attorney. <br /> When the Chairman asked why the store was operating in Apache <br /> without permission from the City, Mr. Berg told him he had only <br /> recently found out the store was open and from the City Attorney 's <br /> opinion on the question, that the business could probably not be <br /> prohibited from operating. He said the City had started action on <br /> the ordinance amendment when the owner of a similar store to that <br /> which had opened in Apache, without City permission, had come to him <br /> several weeks ago seeking to locate in the St. Anthony Shopping <br /> • Center. <br /> Mr. Jones raised the question of whether this case is not similar to <br /> the one where a print shop was not added as a permitted conditional <br /> use in a B., service office district, through an amendment of the <br /> zoning ordinance because the Council had decided the print shop should <br /> remain as permitted uses only in LI , light industrial districts. <br /> Mr. Berg added that that decision was also based on other criteria <br /> such as problems with adequate parking being provided. <br /> When Mrs. Makowske asked whether the City could develop an ordinance <br /> which would be more strict than state statutes regarding obscene <br /> materials , Mr. Berg stated that, in great part, state statutes on <br /> this matter had evolved through court decisions, and if a more <br /> restrictive ordinance was challenged to its end, it would probably <br /> be heard all the way to the Supreme Court. <br /> Mr. Soth' s October 17th comments regarding the lengths to which a <br /> city may' go in legislating the distribution of obscene materials to <br /> minors were quoted for her including his statement that "it is not <br /> clear whether the City could legally impose a penalty greater than <br /> the state penalty for the same offense" . He had also advised that <br /> "the amendment could not be denied on the grounds that obscene <br /> materials may be sold or rented" at the store because "this would <br /> clearly be an unconditional prior restraint" . <br /> • More than 30 people were present to give input regarding the proposed <br /> amendment, with all who spoke expressing their opposition to the <br /> amendment because of X-rated material they felt was normally associated <br /> with such stores. <br />