HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1980/01/22 Item 22 Item No. 22
01/22/80
Ordinance 1892 � � CITY OF CHULA VISTA � a'"
COUNC[ L AGEVDA STATEMENT �tem N -�'
i /�s/So
For meeting of �������
[TEM TITLE Ordinance �O /� Adding Chapter 5 . 37 to the Chula Vista Diunicipal
Code regulating Drug Paraphernalia Shops in the
City of Chula Vista
---SECOND READING AND 9DOPTION
SUBMITTED BY City Attorney
ITEM EXPLANATION (4/5TH'S VOTE REQUIRED YES_ NO X )
At the meeting of November 13, 1979, the City Attorney ' s office submitted
two ordinances for consideration by the City Council . The first, as
pointed out, was a regulation of those businesses known as "head shops"
which sell paraphernalia for the use of drugs from marijuana to cocaine
to heroin. It was patterned after an ordinance which has been adopted
in the City of Lakewood.
Essentially, this ordinance requires the maintenance of such paraphernalia
in a manner so as to exclude minors from areas where such paraphernalia
or devices are displayed for purposes of sale . Although there has been
substantial commentary regarding the futility of such an ordinance and
even a suggestion that the regulations would be absurd, it is still the
opinion of the City Attorney ' s office that the open display and promotion
of drug paraphernalia creates an attractive invitation to minors and that
such a restriction is not at all unreasonable . The ordinance is again
presented for consideration of the Council .
The second ordinance would have been proposed on an interim basis to
include head shops and, for reasons previously stated, disco establishments
in the adult business classification. It has now been determined that such
action may not be undertaken through the procedure of the interim zoning
ordinance . In fact, the interim zoning ordinance procedure must be
clearly restricted to the prohibition of certain uses pending the completion
GDL: lgk
EXNIBITS
Agreement_ Resolution_ Ordinance X Plat_ Notification List_
Other Letter from ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached_ Submitted on
FINANCIAL IMPACT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Place Ordinance on First Readi
� ,
by the Cit,� C��.�.::;il of
Chula Vista, C�I:iO��I3
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
• Dated �-2.2— �O
COUNCIL—ACT-ION-- -- —"'°l�' ��_��— — '- � �
�. - � .
�c��?j by the City Council of by the City Council of
J Chula Vista, Califomia Chula Vista, California
Dat�d �`�"`�'� '�9 Dated 1'/S'�Q
---_
Form A-113 (Rev. 5/77)
�.} , .
J9 ' . _� . .
. � , a� :
� Agenda Item � y�
For Meeting of ��¢9¢�§ 1 {-Y'S/80
. Page Two
• i
_ of a study or proposed modification of an ordinance . It may not be
utilized to au'tfiorize additional uses or establish regulations for '
such uses . It is clearly in the nature of a. moratorium process,
and in ttie future any- moratoria should be adooted by the interim
zoning 'procedure.
. i
�
I I
� U 5� i
i
. �.
�� , . .
�� n. . ..
, �_�
::�_:
� ''-L� CHQLA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
�- �G�
-,��.J
- � h� �
=;:=i o �7 f.
-c-< c� 6�i
January 7, 1980 �°, Z n
�� � ;�
�� •�
U�r 'r. '
s "� r;^
Mayor Will T. Hyde and City Council �� � 9
City of Chula Vista �� w �
276 Fourth Avenue ma �p
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Gentlemen:
Reference is made to your letter of December 17, requesting the
Chamber of Co�erce to co�ent on the suggested ordinance relating
to drug paraphernalia.
We are most appreciative of the opportunity to review the
ordinance. �
The ordinance was analyzed by the members of the Executive
Cou�ittee of this chamber and they did not find objections
to it. A concern was expressed regarding the enforcement.
Very truly yours,
/�2L s��
K. Niek Slijk
Executive Vice President
Chula Vista Chamber of Co�erce
KNS/mi
�� Lv ;T� /�i1H I/9�('r E.P
�,��.� //7ydR.vr/
/ -i/` �
� D �r
23O GLOVER PVENLIE • CMLILn VISTA. CALIFORNIA 9201 ❑ • TELEPMONE: < 20�6602
a . . ,
• . �� i
• ' - � � :� , /1 - y'> 9
� .k _ - �,; �
�r�rl.�.. .nl,+ '' M M•7l7, ../.•'/T.:s'� �'1 I'/S -d'd
:. . ,�, ,��,.'�l.,�.l..� n[ �/. �'� ' tU� r lll11�S���li! .
�:, � �� �� � ' �M I ,� � $ � '� � ► � �..
- . �.:.� - � _ . �` - - - -
City o� (�'l�uQa �Uis�a
CALIFORNIA
or•rice c�r• 'n�e
CI'I'1' ,\'I"lOItNEY -
DATE: November 9 , 1979
TO: The Honorable Piayor and City Council
' FROM: George D. Lindberg, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Regulation of Drug Paraphernalia Shops and
Discos
The Mayor has referred to this office materials from the City
of Lakewood which has embarked upon a campaign to regulate
those businesses commonly known as "head shops" which sell
paraphernalia for the use of drugs ranging from marijuana to
cocaine to heroin.
The main thrust. of the Lakewood regulation, and incidentally
they point out that a total ban on such shops is not legally
possible for cities in California because of the state pre-
emption) is to deny easy access and display of such para-
phernalia to minors. It is the opinion of this office that
a similar ordinance would be well advised for adoption by the
City of Chula Vista. Such a proposed ordinance is attached
hereto as Exhibit A.
In addition to the regulatory ordinance, the City Attorney
would also recommend that such businesses be included in the
list of adult oriented recreation businesses so that they
might be confined to limited areas of the City and subject
� to conditional use permit approval to insure the least amount
of infringement upon the rights and interests of legitimate
business enterprises. In this regard, it is also recommended
that the list of adult oriented businesses be expanded to
include discotheques. The present ordinance does list dance
halls which, however, are defined as establishments wherein
the patrons may� dance with another person for a fee; whereas,
the disco, of course, is merely a dance hall where music is
provided by mechanical means , i.e. stereos.
This suggestion is made in light of a hearing which the City
Attorney attended in the Superior Court where an owner of a
pizza house was seeking a writ of mandate to force the opera-
tors of a disco located immediately adjacent to his business
► �, � v
276 Focrth Avenur, Chula Vista, CA 92010 ( 714) 5'S—$�3�
The Honorable Mayor,' and City Council
November 9; 1979 �
' Page Two
to police the, activities of the young.-people who went into the
disco. and who deliberately and maliciously interfered with the
, rights of the ;patrons_of the: pizza tiouse threatening both �the
patrons and the employees with .bodily harm.. �The� writ was
denied and �the , court speci�fically� noted that the best means
of regulating such establishments and protecting other legiti-
mate businesses was to utilize ,the zoning laws .such as the
type. of ordinance sustained by the Supreme Court. in the Detroit
mini-theater case'.
, - Therefore; it is recommended that the .City Council adopt. an
anendment. to our- adult recieation ordinance is a form essen-
tially as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto.
GDL: lgk
Enc.
cc: City Manager
Director of Planning
Chief of Police
Development Services Administrator
�9 ?�