EAST ST. LOUIS - Belleville’s regulation of adult entertainment businesses doesn’t violate the U.S. Constitution, District Judge Stephen McGlynn ruled on Aug. 29.
He dismissed a complaint of the Shopping Delite business, which challenged the ordinance as a restriction of expressive conduct.
“The ordinance serves a substantial government interest and does not unreasonably limit plaintiff’s expressive speech,” he wrote.
The city council adopted it in 2018, stating it would promote and preserve public health and safety and it would curb negative effects that accompany adult entertainment.
It limits adult oriented stores to zone D-1 for light industry or zone D-2 for heavy industry.
It defines an adult oriented store as one with a substantial or significant portion of its trade in adult books, videos or novelties.
A second definition applies if any portion of its trade is in conjunction with rooms, areas or facilities for presentation and observation of any adult item sold or rented there.
A third definition applies to oils, lotions, gels or creams intended for stimulation of genital organs, sexual arousal or sadomasochistic use.
The ordinance provides processes for licensing and appealing denials and revocations.
In 2021, John K. Coil applied for a commercial occupancy permit for Shopping Delite at 4507 North Belt West in the C-2 zoning district.
As workers stocked shelves an inspector arrived and noticed boxes of edible underwear.
The city informed Coil that the underwear constituted adult novelties and would cause the city to consider the store an adult entertainment business.
Coil stated he would remove the items but the city didn’t issue a permit.
In 2022, zoning director Clifford Cross told Coil the retail business he claimed to operate was an adult oriented business.
The city mailed a violation notice to Coil giving him 15 days to take corrective measures.
He didn’t appeal and instead he sued the city.
His counsel Thomas Maag of Wood River claimed the ordinance regulated expressive conduct in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
Belleville moved to dismiss the complaint and McGlynn denied it, finding Shopping Delite pleaded a plausible claim for relief.
This June, city counsel Timothy Hoerner of Belleville moved for summary judgment.
Maag missed a deadline to respond and on Aug. 27 he moved for an extension of time.
He wrote that the delay was “caused by the unexpected press of other business including multiple appeal briefs in multiple cases.”
Instead of extending time, McGlynn granted summary judgment and dismissed Shopping Delite’s complaint with prejudice.
“The undersigned notes that plaintiff did not seek an extension until more than 30 days after the deadline expired and more than 60 days after the filing of the motion,” McGlynn wrote.
“As such, said motion is denied as untimely.
“Indeed, it was too little, too late.”
He found the city offered assistance in curing the rejection and was prepared to provide guidance.
“Moreover, the statute did not regulate the speech itself but rather the quantity of said speech,” he wrote.
He found reasons for the ordinance included protecting order and morality, preventing deterioration of neighborhoods, promoting retail trade, maintaining property values, and ensuring sanitary and safe public places.
“Clearly, the city’s rationale was premised on the theory that it may reduce the costs of secondary effects without substantially reducing speech,” he wrote.
He found Coil owns and operates more than 70 businesses in at least 13 states.
“The only real difference amongst Mr. Coil’s businesses is the name, which he changes based on geographical factors to cater to locals," he wrote.