Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/06/1999

Home

Page 2 -- March 10, 1999 Z.B. Adult Entertainment-- State law effectively bars adult bookstore anywhere in township Citation: 7bwnship of Saddle Brook v. A.B. Family Center Inc., Supreme CoUrt of New Jersey, No. A-180 September Term 1997 (1999) A.B. Family Center wanted to sell and rent adult videos and related mer- chandise in the townshiP of Saddle Brook, N.j. It applied to the township for a certificate of occupancy for its store. The township denied Family Center's request, apparently based on a local ordinance that barred adult bookstores anywhere in the township. The town- ship also apparently relied on a state statute that prohibited adult businesses within 1,000 feet of places of worship, schools or school bus stops, playgrounds, or residential zones. Family Center appealed to the board of adjustment, which affirmed the township's decision. Family Center opened the Store anyway. The zoning officer ordered Family Center to stop selling or renting adult materials, but Family Center refused. The township sued Family Center, seek- lng a court order requiring Family Center to comply with the township zoning ordinances and the state law. Family Center claimed both the township's ordinance and the state law were unconstitutional as applied to the township. Because the way the town- ship was developed and zoned, it argued, there was no place to operate an adult business without violating either law. The court ruled in Family Center's favor, finding both the local and state laws were unconstitutional because they prohibited adult businesses anywhere in the township. The township appealed. The appeals court agreed that the local ordinance was unconstitutional, but found the state law was not. According to the court, the state law was meant to create a 1,000-foot buffer around adult businesses that applied beyond any particular municipal boundaries, so its constitutional- ity couldn't be based strictly upon its effect in one township. The appeals court returned the matter for the trial court to determine whether there were sites outside the township, but within reasonable proximity of Family Center's cur- rent location, available for adult businesses. Family Center appealed to the state's highest court. DECISION: Affirmed. The township had to prove Family Center could locate its business within a reasonable distance of its current location. The state law wasn't automatically unconstitutional simply because it pro- hibited an adult business from locating anywhere in one particular municipal- ity; the law's constitutionality could be decided by looking outside of the bound- aries of the township. The statute wasn't a statewide zoning law; it was a statewide restriction creating a 1,000-foot buffer around adult businesses. The law was constitutional as