TITLE
Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Section 21.15.2990, Table 32-1 and Table 32-1A of Chapter 21.32, Section 21.52.273; and by adding Section 21.45.166, all related to tattoo parlors, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)
DISCUSSION
In 2010, the United States 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the act of tattooing is a federally-protected form of Freedom of Speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Following this ruling, a number of California cities, including Oceanside, Torrance, and Hermosa Beach, were determined to be in violation of the First Amendment by placing too many restrictions and locational requirements on prospective tattoo parlors and artists. Similarly, in March 2017, Real v. City of Long Beach, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Title 21 of the Long Beach Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) violates the First Amendment by unreasonably restricting prospective tattoo artists from establishing tattoo parlors in Long Beach.
Pursuant to Real v. City of Long Beach, the City Attorney’s Office requested that staff prepare a Zoning Code Amendment with tattoo regulations that are content-neutral, uphold the First Amendment rights, and provide reasonable performance and locational standards, and an administrative approval and relief process that considers existing land uses.
On February 1, 2018, the Planning Commission (Exhibit A - Planning Commission Report) held a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment on tattoo parlors. The Planning Commission received a staff presentation, deliberated, closed the public hearing, and in its advisory capacity to the City Council, found the amendment consistent with the General Plan. Following the hearing and discussion, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the Zoning Code Amendment. This recommendation is consistent with the General Plan, specifically upholding the Land Use...
Click here for full text