2005/06/15 Council Agenda Packet

Consultants' Final Report - Page 14 In this case the City of Renton relied heavily upon the study of secondary effects done in Seattle to justify its ordinance. The Court held: We hold that Renton was entitled to rely on the experiences of Seattle and other cities, and in particular on the "detailed findings" summarized in the Washington Supreme Court's [Northend Cinema, Inc. v. Seattle, 90 Wash. 2d 709, 585 P. 2d 1153 (1978)] opinion, in enacting its adult theater zoning ordinance. The First Amendment does not require a city, before enacting such an ordinance, to conduct new studies or produce evidence independent of that already generated by other cities, so long as whatever evidence the city relies upon is reasonably believed to be relevant to problem that the city addresses."21 The Los Angeles City Planning Department conducted a study of secondary effects in 1977,22 to support a spacing ordinance similar to the Detroit dispersal model. Since Garden Grove's ordinance follows the same model it may have been legally sufficient for the City of Garden Grove to rely on the Los Angeles study. However, the Los Angeles study is 19 years old and it could be argued that because of its size, population structure, real estate market, and other municipal characteristics, Los Angeles is not a good comparison city for Garden Grove. Like the LA Study23 this analysis relies on a multimethodological approach to analyze secondary effects associated with the location of adult businesses. Both an analysis of crime rates and surveys were conducted to analyze secondary effects '-' Renton, id., 475 U.S. 41 at 51-52. 22 See LA Study supra_ note 23 Supra note 11. EVER00354