Judge Negates Law Restricting Strip Clubs

SIMI VALLEY — A city ordinance restricting locations for strip clubs and other adults-only businesses was wiped out Wednesday by a federal court judge’s final ruling.

Though the decision--which varies little from a temporary ruling issued last month--was expected, it set off a new round of legal maneuverings on both sides.

The case involves Simi Valley businessman Phil Young’s years-long battle to open a strip club. He sued the city, charging that his civil rights were violated by the law, which bars X-rated businesses from operating within 1,000 feet of a school or religious facility, or within 500 feet of any business catering to youths.

In a 13-page decision, U.S. District Court Judge William J. Rea agreed with Young. His reasoning: The ordinance allowed churches, schools and other so-called “sensitive uses” to knock out an adult business at any time during the permitting process. Also, the wording of the law left too few possible sites for strip clubs to set up shop.

The ruling “is a victory for freedom,” said Young’s attorney, Roger Jon Diamond. “In America, people ought to be able to do what they want to do whether it’s the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms or the 1st Amendment right for an adult to see what he or she wants to see in a building where minors are excluded.”

To protect citizens from what they contend would be harmful side effects of a strip joint, after Rea’s temporary ruling, Simi Valley City Council members hurriedly passed a 45-day moratorium on all adults-only businesses.

And they vowed to appeal the decision to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

“If the residents want us to spend their tax dollars [on an appeal], then that’s what we’ll do,” City Councilwoman Barbara Williamson said.

At a special meeting Sept 4., the moratorium will probably be extended 10 1/2 months, Mayor Greg Stratton said. The moratorium could be extended two years, but City Atty. John Torrance said it would likely last only long enough to fix the faulty law, perhaps three or four months.

“We have our beliefs about what the law should be and [Rea] has his views about what the law should be,” Stratton said. “If he’s making new law, and we don’t agree with it, then we’ll appeal it all the way up the line.”

Torrance said the existing law could be retooled several ways to make it acceptable, possibly by setting a firm date after which an adult club could not be bumped--say the date of a public hearing or the date a project’s planning application is deemed complete. Or the distances could be shortened to create more possible sites for the dance club.

“Maybe we’ll put it in the Arroyo [Simi],” Williamson joked. “That’s where it belongs.”

Young and his Santa Monica-based attorney have a legal challenge in mind as well. They plan to contest the moratorium’s validity; without the moratorium, Simi Valley would be vulnerable to any sort of adult business in any part of the city until the law is rewritten.

Because nude dance is considered free expression protected by the 1st Amendment, cities cannot legally ban adult establishments from moving into town. But city leaders can regulate potential harmful side effects of such businesses--namely crime--by limiting where cabarets and adult bookstores can set up shop.

The Rev. Norman Walker--also the school board president--thinks judges such as Rea misinterpret constitutional guarantees.

“When judges can’t tell the difference between an op-ed column and dancing naked on the tables of some bar, they have truly reached the low point of moral depravity,” he said.