Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Places Lewdness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate amends and passes public-places/obscenity bill, adds intent language to block private-club loophole
Summary
Lawmakers amended a public-places prohibition (first substitute Senate Bill 244) to change the definition from a "bikini" standard to a "pasty" standard, debated whether the state should preempt local ordinances, and ordered intent language spread on the journal to clarify that businesses cannot avoid the statute by designating themselves private clubs.
The Senate engaged in lengthy debate March 3 over first substitute Senate Bill 244, a public-places/lewdness prohibition that drew sustained argument about definitions, scope, and the proper level of government to regulate adult-entertainment venues.
Senator Taylor introduced amendments to replace a "bikini" standard with a "pasty" standard and cited an Indiana precedent: "This is the pasty standard... that was upheld," he said on the floor as he walked senators through specific language changes. Proponents argued the change preserved constitutionally defensible language; opponents raised concerns about local control, noting many localities already regulate adult-entertainment businesses.
Senator Wharton questioned why the bill would take a local issue (primarily in South Salt Lake, he said) to the state level, arguing it shifts the cost and legal burden from local governments to the state if challenges arise. "The burden has turned to the state instead of that locality," Wharton said. Senator Hall and others expressed unease about leaving certain victim classes off advisory lists, and legislative counsel's advice prompted the sponsor to propose intent language clarifying that a business cannot evade the statute by calling itself a private club or charging a membership or admission fee.
The Senate adopted the substantive amendments and ordered the following intent language spread upon the pages of the journal: that "public place includes, but is not limited to, a place to which admission is gained by payment of a membership or admission fee, however designated," and that removal of the original definition was not intended to allow avoidance by reclassification as a private club.
Outcome: The bill and associated first substitute versions were considered and the Senate recorded passage for the substitute; the sponsor secured inclusion of the legislative intent language to strengthen prosecutorial clarity and to preserve the statute's reach against businesses attempting to designate themselves as private-only venues.
