Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council directs staff to review fortune‑telling permit language, fees in city code
Summary
The council voted unanimously May 6 to ask staff to review Apache Junction City Code Volume 1, Chapter 8 provisions for fortune‑telling businesses, including a longstanding $1,200 annual permit fee and the code language that requires director of public safety approval.
The Apache Junction City Council voted May 6 to direct staff to review and consider updates to City Code Volume 1, Chapter 8 concerning fortune‑telling businesses and the permit fee that historically has been set at $1,200 annually.
City staff said the code currently contains a broad definition of “fortune telling” and a line requiring a special permit and approval by the director of public safety; staff reported the $1,200 fee has not been used specifically to cover background checks or other identified services. The council authorized staff to prepare ordinance options for council consideration.
Nick (city staff) summarized the existing rules and staff’s recommendation. “We have…a pretty inclusive definition for fortune telling,” he said, and noted the code requires an additional permit with an annual $1,200 fee but does not explicitly authorize use of that fee for background checks. He said staff’s review found the fee “wasn’t specifically used for background checks” and recommended removing the extra permit language so fortune‑telling businesses would be subject to standard business licensing instead.
Council members debated whether to handle carnivals and circuses — which the current code also lists separately — in the same review. One council member said carnival operators require more inspection because of temporary equipment and suggested staff analyze how other cities treat temporary amusements; another council member urged adding circuses and carnivals to the research. The clerk’s office staff said a separate review of temporary amusement permits could be scheduled if the council wished.
The motion as moved directed staff to review and consider updates to the city code section and the prescribed permit fees and to return with ordinance options. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
Staff indicated options could include eliminating the extra permit and fee, reducing the fee, or maintaining the current structure and adding an explicit public‑safety background‑check requirement; the council did not adopt a final ordinance at the meeting.
