Laserfiche WebLink
Doug Fountain inquired if adult use accessory businesses can be restricted from publicly <br />displaying adult magazines available on the premises. Mr. Fountain inquired if it would be <br />possible to have adult use accessory businesses have those magazines presented for sale upon <br />request only. <br /> <br />Mr. Licht stated that he will research Mr. Fountain's inquiry. <br /> <br />Natalie Haas Steffen noted that the citizens have not been brought up-to-date regarding whether or <br />not what is being displayed at the existing adult bookstore is defined as obscene. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley replied that the reports he has seen indicate that obscene material does not exist in the <br />current adult bookstore. Mr. Hartley explained that the method in which courts deal with obscenity <br />is on a case by case basis. Part of the Miller decision talks about community standards and, <br />because of that Miller decision, each and every obscenity prosecution has to be considered on a <br />case by case basis. One item found to be obscene in one instance, in another court, could be found <br />not to be obscene. Ramsey's chances are better if it were to prosecute something that was already <br />determined to be obscene, but there is no guarantee of that. The types of material known to be <br />available at the present bookstore have not been found to be obscene. Should Ramsey proceed to <br />prosecute obscenity or something that might be obscene according to community standards? The <br />$100,000.00 budgeted for the law suit in Ramsey's current case would be the price tag for each <br />and every obscenity prosecution. For that reason, Ramsey has requested the assistance of the <br />County Attorney's office and the Minnesota Attorney General's office in dealing with obscenity. <br /> <br />Natalie Haas Steffen stated that she applauds the City for what it has done so far and for paying <br />particular attention to community standards. <br /> <br />Mr. Czerwonka noted that adult accessory use is being defined as consuming 10% of the available <br />space in a business and inquired if it wouldn't be better to define adult use accessory based on the <br />amount of proceeds, say 20%, for example. <br /> <br />Mr. Licht replied that it is fairly easy to restrict adult use accessory according to space requirements <br />from a building inspection standpoint. To regulate based on financial operations becomes <br />impossible to police. <br /> <br />Walter Owens - 9431 ~ 176th Avenue N.W. - inquired if research has turned up any information <br />regarding the effect of licensing fees as a controlling factor in future development of these types of <br />businesses. <br /> <br />Mr. Licht replied that licensing fees have been proven as not an obstacle to stop some activity from <br />occurring. In addition, licensing fees have to be tied to processing time and the cost for same <br />cannot be used as a means for a community to generate profit. If the licensing fee is set based on <br />the cost of processing the application, then the fee charged would not be a prohibative expense to <br />the applicant. <br /> <br />Joe McGinnis - 17051 Yttrium Street N.W. - stated that he is not ready to accept pornography in <br />this community. Mr. McGinnis also inquired if hours of operation could be established for adult- <br />type uses. <br /> <br />Mr. Licht stated that setting hours of operation warrants further consideration. Currently, the City <br />does not have the automatic right to set hours of operation and that would become one of the <br />conditions that might be looked upon disfavorably as a regulation. <br /> <br />Cheryl Krats - 6326 Okapi Street N.W. - inquired as to why County undercover agents cannot be <br />sent into the bookstore to try and find evidence of obscene material and press charges. <br /> <br />Public Hearing/October 9, 1990 <br /> Page 13 of 14 <br /> <br /> <br />