The City of Florence held a special meeting this week to begin the process of updating its ordinance dealing with sexually oriented businesses and their employees.
Back in July, the Boone County Fiscal Court updated its ordinances to reflect updates from federal law and other changes, and Florence wants to keep the laws that affect the county and the city as similar as possible.
“As you know, prior to 2007, the zoning regulations in the City of Florence’s Code of Ordinances did not allow a sexually oriented business to operate in any form in the City or County,” said Joshua Hunt, Director of Administration and CAO. “In 2007, the City, in conjunction with the Boone County Fiscal Court, adopted the first licensing requirements and zoning regulations for sexually oriented businesses. Most of the council members were part of those original discussions, which included in-depth analysis that took place during that time, and they came up with a well thought out licensing and zoning process. So what we’re discussing tonight is nothing more than a housekeeping measure.
He said that since 2007, the nature of sexually oriented businesses, specifically the definitions and numerous lawsuits, have evolved, making many of the definitions in the lawsuits outdated. Since the county has updated its laws, Hunt said the city will make its updates.
He agreed that it is a long ordinance and not easy to follow, but in addition to the red-lined version, where the old parts are red-lined to show they are no longer in effect, councillors were given a clean ordinance that clearly shows what the updated law is. He asked the councillors to follow the ordinance as he walked them through the changes.
The biggest changes, he told them, were the court cases cited throughout the document.
“Definitions have been clarified and expanded,” he said. “New definitions have been added to reflect the evolving nomenclature of the SOB industry. Hearing Officers are now appointed by the City Council rather than the Mayor. Several definitions have been expanded, most notably the definitions of nudity, operator, shopping centre, sexual device and sexual device shop.
Licensing requirements have been tightened, or proposed to be tightened, and it’s mostly just the disclosure of past criminal activity involving sexually oriented businesses and/or if the applicant has been convicted of a sex crime.
More specific time requirements are proposed for the issuance of licences, and a new fee schedule for licences is proposed. Language has been added to allow the City of Florence Code Enforcement Department to conduct routine inspections and issue citations, and penalties are more clearly defined.
“So while they look like a substantial overhaul, there are a lot of words that have changed in there,” Hunt said. “The fact is that the way we have dealt with sexually oriented businesses since 2007 will be the same, but our bylaw will now be consistent with all these changes.”
Coun. Lesley Chambers was uncomfortable with the breadth and depth of the whole issue.
“I’m looking at this part where if I’m an employee of a sexually oriented business in a cabaret, I have to apply for a licence,” she said. “And that I can be denied that licence if I have previous convictions for various crimes. Is that true? I guess my concern is if you have somebody who wants to do a legitimate job and they’ve had run-ins with the law in the past, but we’re not giving them that second chance to get their work record straight because of things they’ve done in the past. I just don’t see any reason why, if someone has a conviction for something they’ve done in the last five years, they shouldn’t be allowed to apply”.
Hunt said that each application would be considered on its own merits and that they would take everything into account. He said there was an appeal process where they could go before a committee and make their case.
Chambers went on to ask if it was true that these shops would not be allowed to sell alcohol of any kind. Hunt confirmed this and said that they also cannot be within 1000 feet of an establishment that sells alcohol.
Chambers asked if Hunt thought the $100 fee the city charged for a licence was excessive, considering the person might be trying to turn their life around.
Hunt said he didn’t think so, adding that, to be clear, there are no cabaret establishments in the city. He said the only sexually oriented business in town is the Larry Flynt store near Walmart.
Mayor Julie Aubuchon said that currently when a circus comes to the Florence Mall, all of their employees have to have the same licence. She said if they were to perform in a circus somewhere else in the city, they would have to get an additional licence for each location. So if the person was performing in a cabaret, they could perform in another cabaret, but they would have to have a licence for each location.
“That’s a lot of information and we get these packets at 4pm on Friday and no one from the city is available until 8am on Monday to discuss this,” Chambers said. “Can I make a motion? I would like to postpone any action on this?”
Hunt clarified that the things she was questioning were already part of the bylaw and not part of the proposed changes. They are already an established part of the licensing process. He said there was no motion in its current form to amend or make any of the changes she alluded to.
Mayor Aubuchon said there was already a motion and second on the table, so that motion would have to pass or fail before another motion could be introduced, unless the councillors who made the motion withdrew their motion.
Councillor Jenna Kemper said there were some things in the bylaw that confused her too, so she wanted to table the issue.
Coun. Patricia Wingo said she worked with this ordinance back in 2007, and that was an in-depth study of what provisions to put in the ordinance, and she understood that the current changes were more housekeeping measures to keep the city’s law current and fair.
“It’s probably easier for me; when I look at it and I read all the changes, I understand everything because I’m familiar with it,” she said. “You just have to read it and understand it. I don’t know what else to say.
Attorney Thomas Nienaber said that when Boone County enacted its ordinance, they consulted with a well-known authority on these types of ordinances, and when it came time to update the ordinance, the county used the services of the same authority to make sure they were in compliance. Florence’s ordinance is still modelled on Boone County’s.
“This ordinance doesn’t ban sexually oriented businesses,” Hunt said. “It identifies and recognizes the fact that it’s a category of use, it says okay, this is where it’s appropriate and these are the rules you have to follow to get the license and the zoning.”
Mayor Aubuchon added that if they were to ban the businesses it would be unconstitutional and the city is not allowed to do that.
Hunt said he had spent a lot of time working with attorney Nienaber and felt it was in the best interest of the town and consistent with the county.
The vote was 3 to 1, with one abstention, so the motion passed. Chambers explained her no vote by saying she did not disagree with anything Josh Hunt said, but she did not feel she had done enough research to vote yes. Councillor Jenna Kemper was the abstaining councillor.