Laserfiche WebLink
METHOD OF ANALYSIS <br />In the preparation of this report, several data sources were employed. <br />Current weekly national news magazines were searched for references to the <br />problems of major urban areas relative to this topic. Several individual cities <br />known to be exploring methods of controlling the growth of the adult -only <br />industry were contacted and adopted City Ordinances were reviewed. The American <br />Society of Planning Officials provided advance information from an unreleased <br />publication on Adult Entertainment which has since been published (copy included <br />for your review). Several recent Supreme Court decisions were reviewed in order <br />to determine the general mood of the law as handed down.2 <br />This information was synthesized into a form which details the national limita- <br />tions placed upon a state and city in the land use control of adult -only businesses. <br />The Texas obscenity law was then reviewed in order to determine the limitations of <br />legislative regulation of adult -only businesses and the extent to which Amarillo, as <br />a city,may regulate the industry through land use and licensing mechanisms. <br />DEFINITIONS <br />Obscenity is defined by the Supreme Court in the following exerpts- from <br />Marvin Miller v State of California: <br />1. "Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment, Roth v <br />United States, 354, U.S. 476, 77 S. Ct. 1307, 1L. Ed. 2d 1498, <br />.reaffirmed. A work may be subject to state regulation where that <br />work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest in sex; <br />portrays, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically <br />defined by the applicable state law; and taken as a whole, does not <br />have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." <br />2. "The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether <br />the average person, applying contemporary community standards would <br />find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, <br />Roth, Supra, at 489, 77 S. Ct. at 1311; (b) whether the work depicts <br />or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically <br />defined by the applicable state law, and (c) whether the work, taken <br />as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific <br />value. If a state obscenity law is thus limited, First Amendment <br />values are adequately protected by ultimate independent appellate <br />review of constitutional claims when necessary." <br />-2- <br />EVER00322 <br />