COURT BACKS DEVELOPER IN STRIP CLUB ORDINANCE VIOLATED RIGHTS.

Byline: David Greenberg  Staff Writer

Capping a five-year legal battle, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld a federal court ruling that Simi Valley officials violated a developer's rights when they granted, then rescinded, a permit to open a strip club.

By a unanimous decision, the high court refused to hear the city's appeal of a U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision which found that restrictive zoning ordinances violated the First Amendment rights of developer Philip Young.

The appellate court last June struck down a Simi Valley ordinance that allowed permit applications for churches, youth organizations and other ``sensitive uses'' to disqualify pending applications for adult uses.

``This is a huge victory because cities throughout California and the United States will not be able to allow sensitive uses to come in at the last moment to knock out a pending application for an adult business permit,'' said Roger Diamond, attorney for Young. ``The First Amendment was violated by a zoning scheme. (The ruling) vindicates the position we took all along. We won every step of the way.''

The cities of Los Angeles and Thousand Oaks joined some 40 other municipalities statewide in filing a ``friend of the court'' brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the circuit court's ruling.

Simi Valley City Attorney David Hirsch said he was disappointed by the high court's refusal to hear the case because it previously had ruled that cities have the right to regulate adult businesses.

``We felt the case presented the court with important issues regarding regulation of sexually oriented businesses,'' he said. ``There are numerous studies that demonstrate that these kinds of businesses cause adverse secondary effects - crime, drugs, so on. (The supporting brief) goes toward demonstrating that the case was a concern to cities throughout the state.''

Hirsch said he will consult with attorney Bert Deixler, who argued the case for the city, to see what options remain. Deixler did not return phone calls.

Young has spent $45,000 in his seven-year attempt to open a strip club in the city - first at 585 Los Angeles Ave., and later at 665 Los Angeles Ave., Diamond said.

City officials in December 1995 told him his application was OK, then refused to grant him the permit because a Bible study group had just begun to rent space in a nearby storefront.

Local zoning ordinances prohibit adult-oriented businesses from existing within 500 feet of sensitive-use operations.

``This has been a major concern to a lot of prospective adult business operators who would like to open and operate an adult business but who have been afraid to spend the money on the application process only to be defeated by a late-arriving sensitive use,'' said Diamond, who specializes in defending adult-oriented businesses.

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision means that the city will also have to pay Diamond's attorney's fees, which he said now total more than $100,000.

In addition, Young, 45, has filed a $1 million civil lawsuit against the city in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.