1
00:00:00,340 --> 00:00:04,720
Aye, aye, aye, aye, aye.

2
00:00:09,640 --> 00:00:10,920
Recording in progress.

3
00:00:15,370 --> 00:00:15,930
Aye, aye, aye,

4
00:00:21,710 --> 00:00:26,690
aye.

5
00:00:41,640 --> 00:00:43,500
Yeah, I don't see her. Yeah,

6
00:01:01,400 --> 00:01:02,640
open it.

7
00:01:32,530 --> 00:01:34,330
I still don't see her.

8
00:01:35,150 --> 00:01:35,730
I guess.

9
00:01:38,530 --> 00:01:41,130
So you can just choose my next question.

10
00:01:41,710 --> 00:01:41,870
Okay.

11
00:01:42,570 --> 00:01:44,270
He's, what do you mean everyone,

12
00:01:44,910 --> 00:01:47,330
it is Thursday, June 13, 2004,

13
00:01:47,730 --> 00:01:49,490
time is 5.33 pm.

14
00:01:50,010 --> 00:01:53,270
This is a special meeting of the City of Council

15
00:01:53,270 --> 00:01:54,490
of the City of Central.

16
00:01:55,130 --> 00:01:57,270
If we can have a roll call please, Ms. Reba.

17
00:01:58,610 --> 00:01:59,610
Mayor Faye.

18
00:02:00,730 --> 00:02:03,210
Mayor Protin Tannucci, Alderman Aiken,

19
00:02:03,670 --> 00:02:04,970
Alderman Enlow, here.

20
00:02:05,330 --> 00:02:05,970
Alderman Williams.

21
00:02:06,230 --> 00:02:06,310
Here?

22
00:02:08,820 --> 00:02:17,300
Okay. Kara is trying to join us, but she just sent me an error message that she's got to update her zoom, so she'll be here soon.

23
00:02:17,300 --> 00:02:17,820
Okay.

24
00:02:18,260 --> 00:02:19,700
Please join me in the question.

25
00:02:22,060 --> 00:02:26,000
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,

26
00:02:26,600 --> 00:02:28,660
and to the republic for which it stands,

27
00:02:29,240 --> 00:02:32,080
one nation under God, indivisible,

28
00:02:32,360 --> 00:02:34,560
with liberty and justice for all of us.

29
00:02:39,300 --> 00:02:43,120
I assume not that any proposed adjustments

30
00:02:43,120 --> 00:02:44,380
to the agenda.

31
00:02:50,220 --> 00:02:52,420
Next we have a conflict of interest,

32
00:02:52,760 --> 00:02:54,420
and it was brought up in our recent meeting

33
00:02:54,420 --> 00:02:58,500
by Mr. Garogi that perhaps I should recuse myself

34
00:02:58,500 --> 00:03:00,700
from even these executive sessions

35
00:03:00,700 --> 00:03:02,360
that we are having in this regard,

36
00:03:02,800 --> 00:03:08,140
and my understanding from our council is that

37
00:03:08,790 --> 00:03:10,420
there would not be any reason,

38
00:03:10,620 --> 00:03:15,600
even if there is a reason further down

39
00:03:16,130 --> 00:03:17,720
for a vote to declare anything

40
00:03:18,230 --> 00:03:20,680
that you think we should move ahead

41
00:03:20,680 --> 00:03:22,820
with the executive sessions, I correct.

42
00:03:22,820 --> 00:03:27,000
So it is going to be ultimately up to you whether, if you believe there's a conflict of interest,

43
00:03:27,280 --> 00:03:32,500
legally, the conflict of interest comes in to play when there's a financial gain or something

44
00:03:32,500 --> 00:03:38,700
like that on an application. Here, what we're talking about is a legislative change. It's going to

45
00:03:38,700 --> 00:03:44,720
be city-wide changes not affecting just one person. It's going to be affecting an entire city.

46
00:03:45,440 --> 00:03:52,120
So under that first conflict of interest, if there's not going to be a financial gain or you're not

47
00:03:52,120 --> 00:03:57,960
And you know, have a special connection to the city at large of the sexually oriented businesses.

48
00:03:58,800 --> 00:04:03,220
I don't believe legally you would be mandated to repeat yourself.

49
00:04:04,680 --> 00:04:11,220
Okay, so my opinion on it is that the conversation will be served by being in it.

50
00:04:11,700 --> 00:04:22,020
The council, but I'm not really, I'm not in the other opinion that anything I would say,

51
00:04:24,860 --> 00:04:26,320
would change the outcome.

52
00:04:26,520 --> 00:04:28,300
We're not voting, I think there's no decision

53
00:04:28,300 --> 00:04:30,540
as being made in the executive session.

54
00:04:31,040 --> 00:04:32,340
But I'm willing to share from you guys

55
00:04:32,340 --> 00:04:33,520
what you guys think about it.

56
00:04:35,340 --> 00:04:38,280
I mean, I'm not, I think there's a conflict

57
00:04:39,240 --> 00:04:40,780
for going into the executive session.

58
00:04:41,140 --> 00:04:43,820
Yeah, we're going to be in just a separate recording.

59
00:04:43,820 --> 00:04:44,460
Recording stopped.

60
00:04:47,620 --> 00:04:48,220
I'm going to start.

61
00:04:52,420 --> 00:04:54,460
Let's just, is it recording that?

62
00:04:54,880 --> 00:04:56,460
Oh, I'm recording here too.

63
00:04:57,160 --> 00:04:57,700
Sorry, let me go ahead.

64
00:05:00,000 --> 00:05:01,200
I'm here.

65
00:05:02,160 --> 00:05:04,380
It won't be showing the camera.

66
00:05:04,800 --> 00:05:13,740
But I think at this stage, Jeremy, you and I will have some serious discussions.

67
00:05:13,740 --> 00:05:14,460
So

68
00:05:16,580 --> 00:05:24,360
much ourselves, you, I, if I were to stand with things, because we've been a few things in the paper, and now it is public.

69
00:05:24,860 --> 00:05:31,120
I might have to refuse myself because I could be against our CI because of Joseph's, my husband's termination.

70
00:05:31,720 --> 00:05:36,500
But I don't think that is the meeting we're here for.

71
00:05:37,500 --> 00:05:41,640
And if you all agree with me, I think Jeremy and I can both stay.

72
00:05:41,640 --> 00:05:47,880
And then comes time when we have to go, and that's when we do, we reduce ourselves.

73
00:05:53,500 --> 00:06:00,300
Garrett, I mean, just, just, well, actually, Jeff, we're starting to talk to go ahead and finish up your thoughts.

74
00:06:01,160 --> 00:06:13,460
I just, specifically, what Karla brought up, so to like, I mean, we should, I don't see why we should go in the executive session when it was a conference dealing with,

75
00:06:13,460 --> 00:06:23,240
what we're dealing with and I think I don't know why is all this stuff that we talked about

76
00:06:23,240 --> 00:06:27,560
and we're going to be able to bring this out in public because I don't see much there

77
00:06:27,560 --> 00:06:28,880
that it wasn't discussed.

78
00:06:29,920 --> 00:06:30,180
Sure.

79
00:06:30,440 --> 00:06:34,320
So I think my presentation will be something that I think can be said out loud.

80
00:06:34,560 --> 00:06:38,400
I think the benefit of being an attorney and having an attorney client for which is a

81
00:06:38,400 --> 00:06:42,400
frank discussion of questions you might have but you might not, you might not actually

82
00:06:42,400 --> 00:06:43,700
understands the implications of.

83
00:06:44,200 --> 00:06:46,020
So that's what the executive session will be.

84
00:06:46,140 --> 00:06:50,220
It will be questions relating to my presentation.

85
00:06:51,240 --> 00:06:54,460
I think that it would be beneficial to have an executive session.

86
00:06:54,640 --> 00:06:56,860
I'm finding the standards to review in front of everyone.

87
00:06:57,020 --> 00:06:58,960
That's not, it's very straightforward law.

88
00:06:59,240 --> 00:07:01,380
So I think it's pretty, that should be in there.

89
00:07:01,460 --> 00:07:03,320
But I think if we're going to have a frank discussion of,

90
00:07:03,480 --> 00:07:05,780
well, is this legal, what if we want to do this?

91
00:07:05,880 --> 00:07:06,540
Would that be legal?

92
00:07:06,660 --> 00:07:08,700
That should be an executive session.

93
00:07:10,080 --> 00:07:11,880
For my legal opinion, I would feel

94
00:07:11,880 --> 00:07:13,800
I don't know how to give legal advice to an existing session.

95
00:07:14,060 --> 00:07:17,640
Obviously, I'm not the decision-maker here, but that's my legal opinion.

96
00:07:18,020 --> 00:07:22,340
It would be more comfortable to give attorney-client privilege information and executive session.

97
00:07:23,000 --> 00:07:27,140
I have questions that I want to ask an executive session.

98
00:07:32,450 --> 00:07:41,530
I'm still discussing what's been suggested by the public that I should reduce myself from an executive session.

99
00:07:41,530 --> 00:07:44,130
And it's my understanding, in my opinion,

100
00:07:44,130 --> 00:07:49,430
that executive session is to get legal advice on the matter.

101
00:07:50,370 --> 00:07:55,930
And if I just believe that I add to consciousness

102
00:07:55,930 --> 00:07:57,970
and that I don't take away from the conversation,

103
00:07:57,970 --> 00:08:04,570
so if our legal team believes that I should not be

104
00:08:04,570 --> 00:08:05,990
the case in myself and that I should be

105
00:08:05,990 --> 00:08:08,450
in the executive session, then I'm going to understand.

106
00:08:08,450 --> 00:08:14,690
in unless there's a I will default to a vote of if my progressive council

107
00:08:14,690 --> 00:08:19,150
disagree with me and and we're not talking about any future votes or anything

108
00:08:19,150 --> 00:08:22,230
like that we're just on the phone and it's an executive session if you guys

109
00:08:22,230 --> 00:08:26,530
don't think the majority of you guys don't believe that I should be in there all

110
00:08:26,530 --> 00:08:31,510
default to your decision but I don't think that that's the the best way for us

111
00:08:31,510 --> 00:08:34,330
Let me just finish up whatever it is.

112
00:08:36,810 --> 00:08:41,050
Well, I know what I have to do when we were discussing sale.

113
00:08:41,550 --> 00:08:42,790
I accuse myself.

114
00:08:43,990 --> 00:08:49,300
And I think as long as,

115
00:08:50,800 --> 00:08:53,320
do you have a valid reason why?

116
00:08:53,560 --> 00:08:56,960
I mean, do we go into executive session and then?

117
00:08:57,960 --> 00:09:00,980
I think if we were talking about an application RCI,

118
00:09:00,980 --> 00:09:05,260
The question of conflict of interest might be a better, it'd be better suited.

119
00:09:06,340 --> 00:09:11,880
But because this is, we're talking about city-wide ordinances and around even talking about,

120
00:09:11,960 --> 00:09:15,520
you know, passing an ordinance tonight, it's more supposed to be like, what do I need

121
00:09:15,520 --> 00:09:18,700
to consider when I'm making this ordinance or making a decision on ordinance?

122
00:09:19,200 --> 00:09:21,200
What are the legal implications of viewing things?

123
00:09:21,760 --> 00:09:27,100
I don't see that there's a financial benefit from the mayor and if he believes that he

124
00:09:27,100 --> 00:09:28,300
does not have a conflict of interest.

125
00:09:29,560 --> 00:09:33,060
That's, from my perspective, legally, I've done my job

126
00:09:33,060 --> 00:09:34,980
and I don't believe that there's a reason legally

127
00:09:34,980 --> 00:09:36,100
he needs to refuse himself.

128
00:09:37,280 --> 00:09:40,820
Mr. Mayor, Council member, if I can't just run into that ad,

129
00:09:42,060 --> 00:09:43,560
that will be going to executive session

130
00:09:43,560 --> 00:09:45,560
over there for legal advice.

131
00:09:46,360 --> 00:09:49,960
And so, there's really not going to be any discussion

132
00:09:49,960 --> 00:09:54,900
or ability for council members to persuade the attorney

133
00:09:54,900 --> 00:09:57,300
we're providing, you know, the legal guidance.

134
00:09:58,020 --> 00:10:00,720
It's really mainly about facts and where we're at.

135
00:10:08,260 --> 00:10:11,220
With the, with the air, air, air, air, air,

136
00:10:11,360 --> 00:10:13,660
it's continuing to be exactly the same here.

137
00:10:16,300 --> 00:10:17,240
Is there any other questions?

138
00:10:17,360 --> 00:10:18,520
Thank you, I'd like to be there.

139
00:10:19,140 --> 00:10:19,420
Okay.

140
00:10:19,980 --> 00:10:21,520
And is there a means for air,

141
00:10:21,800 --> 00:10:23,120
to be any kind of, that's what we can remove?

142
00:10:23,160 --> 00:10:24,040
Yes, there will be.

143
00:10:24,340 --> 00:10:24,540
Okay.

144
00:10:26,440 --> 00:10:26,740
Okay.

145
00:10:27,900 --> 00:10:31,160
And now we're, now we're gonna do a presentation

146
00:10:31,160 --> 00:10:33,780
on what the people overview is.

147
00:10:34,080 --> 00:10:34,400
All right.

148
00:10:35,520 --> 00:10:38,720
So, it's their way in there, which I just tell you next slide or what you can.

149
00:10:39,180 --> 00:10:39,860
Okay, next slide.

150
00:10:41,160 --> 00:10:44,360
All right, so briefly on what we're going to go over here, it's not going to be a very

151
00:10:44,360 --> 00:10:45,020
big lecture.

152
00:10:45,320 --> 00:10:47,920
This is a pretty straightforward issue from a legal perspective.

153
00:10:49,000 --> 00:10:54,060
What I'm going to cover today is your current statutory oriented business or SOV regulations.

154
00:10:54,920 --> 00:11:01,260
Then I'm going to go into how courts review SOV zoning regulations, and then finally I'll

155
00:11:01,260 --> 00:11:03,720
I'll touch on how courts will review a licensee regulation.

156
00:11:04,560 --> 00:11:07,420
And the disclaimer, this is not intended

157
00:11:07,420 --> 00:11:08,860
to cover the proposed ordinances.

158
00:11:08,960 --> 00:11:11,260
I'm not going to give an analysis of what's been proposed

159
00:11:11,260 --> 00:11:14,560
or any other suggestions, because those are proposed

160
00:11:14,560 --> 00:11:16,480
ordinance that's not necessarily what's going to happen.

161
00:11:16,800 --> 00:11:18,960
I'm not going to take questions on hypotheticals,

162
00:11:19,420 --> 00:11:21,180
but I'll just give you basically the overview

163
00:11:21,180 --> 00:11:22,960
of how this all works.

164
00:11:23,700 --> 00:11:24,000
Next slide.

165
00:11:25,640 --> 00:11:27,120
And a little bit wider here.

166
00:11:27,620 --> 00:11:29,160
Why can't we just ban them all right?

167
00:11:29,260 --> 00:11:30,520
Why are we even discussing this?

168
00:11:30,520 --> 00:11:33,400
especially oriented business have first-permanent protections.

169
00:11:33,940 --> 00:11:39,480
That's been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court numerous times as involving communications

170
00:11:39,480 --> 00:11:40,700
protected by the First Amendment.

171
00:11:41,480 --> 00:11:42,860
So, it's that added later.

172
00:11:43,560 --> 00:11:44,920
Now, it's for existing code.

173
00:11:45,580 --> 00:11:46,820
Where do we allow them currently?

174
00:11:47,140 --> 00:11:53,380
Well, technically, under your land use table, 16-3-303, they are allowed in historic downtown

175
00:11:53,380 --> 00:11:55,100
gaming, zone or district.

176
00:11:55,100 --> 00:12:00,220
like the Gregor Gulf Gaming District and the Terransition Zone on that.

177
00:12:00,960 --> 00:12:06,300
Now that Ls are the special provisions that I'll come around the next slide of the additional distance requirements

178
00:12:06,300 --> 00:12:11,060
and operation requirements that are applied, but right now those are the districts that they're allowed under.

179
00:12:12,500 --> 00:12:18,620
And so now you'll see under this table it says sexually oriented businesses.

180
00:12:19,660 --> 00:12:25,540
Right now, that's defined in your code as either being sexually oriented theaters and dancing establishments

181
00:12:25,540 --> 00:12:28,180
and sexually oriented retail establishments.

182
00:12:28,780 --> 00:12:34,940
That term would include adult coverage, new model studios, adult motels, adult motion pictures,

183
00:12:35,160 --> 00:12:38,880
adult theaters, sexual oriented counter centers, and outdoor updates.

184
00:12:39,520 --> 00:12:47,080
So I know there's some conversation at the last meeting that we were introducing a whole bunch of new types of SUVs.

185
00:12:47,080 --> 00:12:47,700
That's just not true.

186
00:12:48,220 --> 00:12:51,580
They were all lumped under this line in the table.

187
00:12:52,640 --> 00:12:53,820
So that's currently what it is.

188
00:12:53,960 --> 00:12:56,560
All of those are allowed in the historic downtown

189
00:12:56,560 --> 00:12:58,400
being the Gregory Golding and Transition

190
00:12:58,400 --> 00:13:00,360
and Zones subject to the following predictions.

191
00:13:02,720 --> 00:13:06,240
They must have all their activities conducted inside.

192
00:13:06,880 --> 00:13:09,520
They must be able to verify the customer's age

193
00:13:09,520 --> 00:13:10,880
before they enter the establishment

194
00:13:10,880 --> 00:13:13,340
or see anything that's related to the SOE.

195
00:13:14,040 --> 00:13:16,240
The interior of the business cannot be visible

196
00:13:16,240 --> 00:13:17,480
on the top side of the building.

197
00:13:17,480 --> 00:13:22,560
and the business must be located more than 1,000 feet from other SOVs, residential

198
00:13:22,560 --> 00:13:28,020
development, dwelling in zone district schools, public parks, shelter places, or

199
00:13:28,020 --> 00:13:31,580
drive-go centers and places of assembly. So they have to, they can be in those

200
00:13:31,580 --> 00:13:33,920
three zones we talked about if they're complying with those things.

201
00:13:37,280 --> 00:13:37,920
In addition

202
00:13:37,920 --> 00:13:43,720
to the zoning, you also have criminalization provisions on two of them. 17,

203
00:13:43,720 --> 00:13:46,900
17, 7, 20, and 17, 7, 30.

204
00:13:47,380 --> 00:13:49,380
Those criminalized loot and decent behavior

205
00:13:49,380 --> 00:13:51,560
and nudity and commercial establishments.

206
00:13:52,440 --> 00:13:53,620
While there's, this isn't, you know,

207
00:13:53,700 --> 00:13:55,580
it doesn't say sexually oriented business anywhere

208
00:13:55,580 --> 00:13:56,700
on those criminal virgins,

209
00:13:56,740 --> 00:13:58,280
it essentially means that they can't function

210
00:13:58,280 --> 00:13:59,980
in the way that they would normally operate.

211
00:14:00,260 --> 00:14:03,380
So this is another provision that basically bans SOBs.

212
00:14:06,620 --> 00:14:08,420
All right, so what's been proposed

213
00:14:08,420 --> 00:14:12,320
as a general idea is changing your land development code

214
00:14:12,320 --> 00:14:14,240
to allow, where we're gonna allow these things.

215
00:14:14,240 --> 00:14:21,480
and also to allow our licensing program to better control any SOB that opens.

216
00:14:22,180 --> 00:14:24,140
So the first one we'll talk about the zoning regulations.

217
00:14:25,180 --> 00:14:31,700
Courts have established a test to see an SOB zoning ordinance as valid under the Constitution.

218
00:14:32,460 --> 00:14:33,400
And that asks two questions.

219
00:14:33,740 --> 00:14:37,160
One is a narrowly tailored to serve a substantial government interest,

220
00:14:37,620 --> 00:14:40,880
and the other one is whether the ordinance allows for a reasonable,

221
00:14:40,880 --> 00:14:45,460
alternate avenue of communication. Next slide, please. So the

222
00:14:45,460 --> 00:14:49,940
safety of government interest prong is almost always easy to pass because they

223
00:14:49,940 --> 00:14:55,720
know there's been numerous studies that SOBs can cause increasing crime, decrease

224
00:14:55,720 --> 00:14:59,900
in property values and stuff like that. So that's when you'll see

225
00:15:00,000 --> 00:15:16,820
And whenever, whatever, whatever, whatever provision or ordinance we pass, you're going to have a really long whereas recitals, and they're going to say stuff like this, and that's why it's in there to establish that we are serving a substantial government interest in enacting any whatever S.O.V. and zoning regulation we have.

226
00:15:19,130 --> 00:15:30,310
This next one is the more tricky one, and this is leaving open reasonable turn of avenues of communication. So under this, as zoning ordinance, the outright bans any S.O.V. from operating.

227
00:15:30,310 --> 00:15:35,790
would likely be unconstitutional because it does not leave open other avenues for communication.

228
00:15:36,650 --> 00:15:38,430
And this is the current problem with the code.

229
00:15:39,930 --> 00:15:45,670
As written under those distance requirements, there's zero places that an SOE can really operate.

230
00:15:46,190 --> 00:15:49,290
So that's why we're recommending some change.

231
00:15:49,550 --> 00:15:55,210
It doesn't have to be the one that was proposed, but some page probably happened because there's zero places in the city that it could open.

232
00:15:55,650 --> 00:16:02,010
Now, there's been other circuit court cases, not federally, not the 10th, which were in

233
00:16:02,010 --> 00:16:08,130
that have said that, you know, smaller municipalities can look outside of the city and look at, you know,

234
00:16:08,230 --> 00:16:11,130
the county or like, you know, a neighboring community.

235
00:16:11,530 --> 00:16:14,350
And that might be a reasonable alternative avenue of communication.

236
00:16:14,790 --> 00:16:17,530
But, you know, my job is to assess the risk for you guys illegally.

237
00:16:18,270 --> 00:16:22,330
I don't think that we should hold our hat on a district court or a court of appeals case

238
00:16:22,330 --> 00:16:23,590
that's not even from our circuit.

239
00:16:23,590 --> 00:16:26,790
It's one case, it kind of goes against most of what the case law said.

240
00:16:27,350 --> 00:16:32,590
The Supreme Court and other circuits have basically said you need to look within the city for regional avenues.

241
00:16:33,830 --> 00:16:44,330
And that's not to say that, you know, the Supreme Court would see it differently now, but to minimize the risk I would recommend changing your land development code to allow SOBs at least somewhere in the city.

242
00:16:47,010 --> 00:16:53,890
And then for us like other zone regulations that have been allowed in City of

243
00:16:53,890 --> 00:16:58,870
Renton, there is a it was very similar to ours a thousand free for

244
00:16:58,870 --> 00:17:03,410
residential and everything but that ordinance left open 5% of the entire land

245
00:17:04,090 --> 00:17:09,790
municipality open for SOV's about 520 acres. Another one was just the

246
00:17:09,790 --> 00:17:14,630
investment zone only that's that's a pretty common one and then that one that

247
00:17:14,630 --> 00:17:19,870
left open 10% of the city city area for operating and then another one is very

248
00:17:19,870 --> 00:17:23,590
similar. This is requirements but in that case it did leave open ample room

249
00:17:23,590 --> 00:17:24,890
where as ours did not.

250
00:17:27,680 --> 00:17:30,200
The important thing though is when you're looking at

251
00:17:30,200 --> 00:17:34,480
leaving open areas for S to V's to operate the question is not whether you know an

252
00:17:34,480 --> 00:17:40,400
SOV tomorrow could buy property in that area and operate. The Supreme Court and

253
00:17:40,400 --> 00:17:43,740
City of Renton basically said SOV operators have to fend for themselves. They

254
00:17:43,740 --> 00:17:46,680
have to find a visit, they have to find the space. It doesn't mean that we have to find

255
00:17:46,680 --> 00:17:51,400
the space where they can operate. It doesn't mean that that area has to be developed. It

256
00:17:51,400 --> 00:17:56,620
just means that technically, if they wanted to, they could buy that property and, you know,

257
00:17:56,780 --> 00:18:01,400
with the operation requirements, open an SOB. So again, it does not have to be commercially

258
00:18:01,400 --> 00:18:05,040
available space. It just has to be somewhere in the city you allow them.

259
00:18:09,560 --> 00:18:18,720
Now for licensing regulations, licensing regulations, because SOBs deal with freedom of speech,

260
00:18:19,960 --> 00:18:23,840
the licensing regulations can be considered a version of what's called a prior restraint,

261
00:18:24,020 --> 00:18:28,080
which is a regulation the government has that you must get approval before you speak.

262
00:18:28,940 --> 00:18:34,180
Prior to transfer, automatically and constitutionally, you can do them, but there is a heavy presumption

263
00:18:34,180 --> 00:18:35,240
and that they're in constitutional,

264
00:18:35,600 --> 00:18:36,580
so you have to be really careful

265
00:18:36,580 --> 00:18:37,400
with how they're drafted.

266
00:18:40,850 --> 00:18:42,750
Basically, with prongs that we need to look at,

267
00:18:42,890 --> 00:18:44,090
the two things that we need to make sure

268
00:18:44,090 --> 00:18:46,550
for a licensing ordinance is that the ordinance

269
00:18:46,550 --> 00:18:49,570
cannot vest unbridled discretion in the government's

270
00:18:49,570 --> 00:18:52,390
officials, in the government's officials

271
00:18:52,390 --> 00:18:54,950
who are charged with responding to or approving

272
00:18:54,950 --> 00:18:57,130
the licenses.

273
00:18:58,230 --> 00:19:01,670
And two, is that you have to have some kind of time limit

274
00:19:01,670 --> 00:19:04,110
on when the decision must be rendered on the license.

275
00:19:04,110 --> 00:19:04,710
That's

276
00:19:08,160 --> 00:19:14,560
part of allow on limited time so you can't limit so it's it's the one that we had dropped and proposed was 30 days

277
00:19:14,560 --> 00:19:21,780
So based on you know, you have to if you file a complete application the city gets 30 days to decide whether or not it's approved

278
00:19:22,320 --> 00:19:29,540
Because otherwise if there was an a time limitation you could technically just keep delaying it forever for it for bid to speech and curve the speech

279
00:19:29,540 --> 00:19:34,640
And that's courts have held is unconstitutional. So you have to have some type of limit on

280
00:19:34,640 --> 00:19:38,180
on when a license can be approved or denied.

281
00:19:39,320 --> 00:19:42,660
And thank you. Can you explain the vital discussion

282
00:19:42,660 --> 00:19:43,620
a little bit for me?

283
00:19:43,780 --> 00:19:44,460
That's a nice question.

284
00:19:45,280 --> 00:19:45,740
Next slide.

285
00:19:46,340 --> 00:19:47,120
Thank you.

286
00:19:47,480 --> 00:19:48,660
Okay, overly broad discretion.

287
00:19:49,300 --> 00:19:53,960
So basically what this means is that you can place restrictions on how an SOB operates.

288
00:19:54,260 --> 00:19:55,940
You can put hours of operation.

289
00:19:56,200 --> 00:19:57,740
You can put added security.

290
00:19:58,240 --> 00:20:02,220
You can put how, you know, the stages work and all that kind of stuff.

291
00:20:02,220 --> 00:20:06,080
And you can have application requirements that you need to give us your name, you need

292
00:20:06,080 --> 00:20:08,880
to give us a fee, you need to give us, you know, your criminal history.

293
00:20:10,120 --> 00:20:15,040
But where the unbridled discretion is, is that if you have application requirements and

294
00:20:15,040 --> 00:20:19,140
someone meets those application requirements, you can't then say no for some other reason.

295
00:20:19,580 --> 00:20:23,480
Basically, if they've given you a complete application, their criminal history is not in violation

296
00:20:23,480 --> 00:20:26,820
of what you've set forth and all that stuff, you have to approve.

297
00:20:27,200 --> 00:20:28,360
You have to approve it.

298
00:20:28,360 --> 00:20:31,060
There's no other way of you saying,

299
00:20:31,400 --> 00:20:33,400
I don't really like you even though you've done everything

300
00:20:33,400 --> 00:20:34,700
and that we've required of you.

301
00:20:35,040 --> 00:20:37,460
I don't want to give you a particular license you can't

302
00:20:37,460 --> 00:20:37,840
have to do that.

303
00:20:38,600 --> 00:20:39,740
But we can't say,

304
00:20:40,040 --> 00:20:42,160
we don't have a keen task.

305
00:20:42,440 --> 00:20:46,480
We don't want for us to do something we can't do.

306
00:20:46,780 --> 00:20:49,160
So that's probably how it would operate

307
00:20:49,160 --> 00:20:51,520
and that'd be something that we would do in the licensing.

308
00:20:51,800 --> 00:20:55,540
I have it looked into that particular topic of whether

309
00:20:55,540 --> 00:20:57,320
they're like how far we can go with it,

310
00:20:57,400 --> 00:20:59,340
mostly what I've been seeing is hours of operation,

311
00:20:59,620 --> 00:21:00,200
and stuff like that.

312
00:21:01,520 --> 00:21:03,240
But I think it would be,

313
00:21:03,920 --> 00:21:07,560
if you have the regulation that applies to all SOVs,

314
00:21:07,780 --> 00:21:09,060
it'd probably be okay.

315
00:21:09,800 --> 00:21:13,860
It just can't be like, you can't keep moving the goalpost.

316
00:21:14,040 --> 00:21:15,900
If you said these are the restrictions we have,

317
00:21:16,180 --> 00:21:17,500
this is what we want from you,

318
00:21:17,660 --> 00:21:19,680
and they do that, you have to give them the license.

319
00:21:20,240 --> 00:21:21,760
So that's how it operates.

320
00:21:21,940 --> 00:21:22,980
That's the over-progestation.

321
00:21:22,980 --> 00:21:29,060
This may be a little more detailed than we need to get into tonight, but in the theme

322
00:21:29,060 --> 00:21:34,040
of what you were just discussing, if we were to regulate and say, you could have the

323
00:21:34,040 --> 00:21:35,880
keeny tops, the keeny bottles.

324
00:21:37,000 --> 00:21:42,760
But I believe, and I'm not sure if I'm 100% correct on this, the state of Colorado states

325
00:21:43,960 --> 00:21:49,920
that cloth dancing would be a pasty in any jeep street.

326
00:21:52,160 --> 00:21:57,520
I'm sorry, is there any way that sounds like maybe some of the questions might be better

327
00:21:57,520 --> 00:21:59,880
votes for legal advice within my case?

328
00:22:00,180 --> 00:22:04,940
Yeah, so this is the kind of stuff that we can discuss, because you raise, I don't have

329
00:22:04,940 --> 00:22:07,840
any answer for you right now on that, that's something that we can look into.

330
00:22:09,740 --> 00:22:13,160
So, that's the thing that we should take into consideration in executive session, though.

331
00:22:13,160 --> 00:22:13,580
Yeah.

332
00:22:14,040 --> 00:22:22,900
So you mentioned investigating malfeasance on the part of the applicant prior to the application.

333
00:22:23,300 --> 00:22:23,460
Yep.

334
00:22:23,500 --> 00:22:25,120
That's been upheld by courts that year.

335
00:22:25,120 --> 00:22:26,320
You can investigate.

336
00:22:27,280 --> 00:22:27,400
Yeah.

337
00:22:27,960 --> 00:22:33,000
It would probably have to be tailored to something relevant to, you know, the operation of the

338
00:22:33,000 --> 00:22:33,500
SOB.

339
00:22:34,920 --> 00:22:40,340
But there has been, it's been upheld that you can have felony, you know, look, check out felonies.

340
00:22:40,340 --> 00:22:42,540
and also just not even for the applicant but employees,

341
00:22:42,540 --> 00:22:44,600
that you can say that you can't hire someone

342
00:22:45,040 --> 00:22:46,260
who has a felony conviction.

343
00:22:47,620 --> 00:22:50,040
That's been upheld, but you can do that.

344
00:22:52,400 --> 00:22:54,040
At the time limit, as I was discussing,

345
00:22:54,560 --> 00:22:56,460
it's just, you must place a time limit

346
00:22:56,460 --> 00:22:58,460
for which the government has to run your decision

347
00:22:58,460 --> 00:23:00,400
on the application, whether it's to approve or deny.

348
00:23:01,720 --> 00:23:04,480
So it's basically, the one that we propose

349
00:23:04,480 --> 00:23:06,260
and will mostly what I see is 30 days.

350
00:23:08,140 --> 00:23:10,820
So, it just has to have a time limit.

351
00:23:10,820 --> 00:23:17,000
And that's the, as long as you have a period of time where it's in there, I think that

352
00:23:17,000 --> 00:23:18,040
that would probably be acceptable.

353
00:23:19,500 --> 00:23:22,620
And that's all I have through, that's the basic framework.

354
00:23:22,980 --> 00:23:27,700
So I'll definitely entertain questions in executive session about everything we've discussed.

355
00:23:30,140 --> 00:23:30,700
Yeah.

356
00:23:33,740 --> 00:23:34,260
Sure.

357
00:23:35,100 --> 00:23:40,040
And Mr. Mayor, council members, special counsel is in the conference room.

358
00:23:43,040 --> 00:23:50,300
I move to go into executive section 2464024B, Colorado revised

359
00:23:50,300 --> 00:23:55,460
statutes for the discussion of specific legal questions with the city attorney and city

360
00:23:55,460 --> 00:24:03,700
special counsel regarding sexually oriented businesses and the regulation of SOBs in the city's

361
00:24:03,700 --> 00:24:03,760
state a new amendment to reduce

362
00:24:03,760 --> 00:24:05,240
This can be determined to

363
00:24:06,420 --> 00:24:08,040
recondamine the June 13th

364
00:24:08,040 --> 00:24:09,840
meeting at the conclusion of

365
00:24:09,840 --> 00:24:13,640
the completion of the June 13th

366
00:24:13,640 --> 00:24:13,820
ceremony.

367
00:24:15,580 --> 00:24:16,060
Second.

368
00:24:17,140 --> 00:24:18,000
On favor?

369
00:24:18,360 --> 00:24:18,740
On item.

370
00:24:19,840 --> 00:24:20,280
On item.

371
00:24:22,660 --> 00:24:24,180
We are in effective set now.

372
00:24:24,580 --> 00:24:24,880
Thank you.

373
00:24:25,120 --> 00:24:25,380
Our service.

374
00:24:26,900 --> 00:24:30,280
Now that you've already in section, because you have a

375
00:24:30,280 --> 00:24:31,800
known set of sit in in exactly.

376
00:24:32,580 --> 00:24:36,300
And you're not in a regular session, or special attention.

377
00:24:36,520 --> 00:24:37,500
Now, that would just be averse.

378
00:24:37,740 --> 00:24:37,880
Good.

379
00:24:39,920 --> 00:24:44,700
My understanding is, I think, validated to a moment ago when you

380
00:24:44,700 --> 00:24:46,120
and special counsels upstairs.

381
00:24:47,080 --> 00:24:49,280
My understanding for reading the Richard call

382
00:24:49,280 --> 00:24:53,780
was that this meeting was to intern a special counsel

383
00:24:53,780 --> 00:24:57,640
to go forward with review of the SOBs in the American.

384
00:25:00,020 --> 00:25:01,900
Previous meetings, as long as it isn't that.

385
00:25:02,920 --> 00:25:06,540
My understanding is that you're going

386
00:25:06,540 --> 00:25:09,180
to have to discuss selection of an attorney.

387
00:25:10,000 --> 00:25:11,560
No, no, that's not correct.

388
00:25:11,740 --> 00:25:14,400
That's what was represented at the Richard call,

389
00:25:14,400 --> 00:25:27,520
and that's what a number of times have been said in public that you're reviewing, interviewing, counsel to advise the city to this issue.

390
00:25:27,680 --> 00:25:30,560
And that's always said, a constitutional in terms.

391
00:25:30,640 --> 00:25:31,220
Never said that.

392
00:25:32,680 --> 00:25:40,200
But when I understand it, you're going to have to talk to somebody who's expert in crafting zoning ordinances, back isn't what you need.

393
00:25:40,200 --> 00:25:46,940
You need somebody that can look at all of those cases that you just cited in a flash

394
00:25:47,840 --> 00:25:55,140
as to their appropriateness, as to their intended purpose, as to how they've been challenged,

395
00:25:55,960 --> 00:26:02,280
as to what possible around these there are other than the standard records.

396
00:26:03,140 --> 00:26:07,800
I don't know if that's been written or not but that's not.

397
00:26:07,800 --> 00:26:13,720
You're not going to hire a councillor or an interview for a councillor from Dell.

398
00:26:14,840 --> 00:26:16,880
And what special councillor is going to observe?

399
00:26:17,280 --> 00:26:26,240
Given us his legal opinion on these matters as far as what is available for us under our current code,

400
00:26:26,740 --> 00:26:29,720
and what is available to us as far as changing code, etc.

401
00:26:30,180 --> 00:26:31,420
Who is that special councillor?

402
00:26:31,840 --> 00:26:32,580
I'm talking that to you.

403
00:26:33,440 --> 00:26:39,520
And you know my opinion is a top I think it's a disaster to be taking advice and I assure you that

404
00:26:39,520 --> 00:26:44,760
City Council feels like we're not getting the advice that we need we will seek for their advice.

405
00:26:45,320 --> 00:26:52,780
I do want to just mention that in the agenda laid out here it's a discussion of specific legal questions

406
00:26:52,780 --> 00:26:59,360
with the City Attorney and the City Special Council regarding sexually oriented businesses and the regulation of those.

407
00:26:59,360 --> 00:27:04,060
So let's say you mean about hiring anybody, you're doing anything like that, but just seeking legal advice.

408
00:27:08,400 --> 00:27:13,640
Since we have an opportunity, I'm going to have an objection, but there is a clear violation of the section.