Strip Club Developer Resumes City Fight

Arguing that Simi Valley violated his constitutional rights by forbidding him to open a nude dance club, a would-be club developer plans to take his case to federal court today in Los Angeles.

Developer Philip Young sued the city in 1994 when city officials hurriedly passed a zoning order that blocked him from opening a striptease club called The Dancing Bear in Simi Valley.

But Young and the city agreed to suspend the lawsuit because he had found a different site for the club on Los Angeles Avenue and wanted to go through the application process anew.

This time, Young proposed to open the Mirages Cabaret, a two-story, 11,000-square-foot complex complete with nude “lap dancing,” a juice bar, an adult bookstore, boutique and video shop.

But the City Council then passed an ordinance forbidding lap dancing and other activities they deemed lewd, and ultimately shot down the application last April because Young proposed to open the club within 750 feet of a karate studio that catered largely to minors.

At the time, the city also said the proposed club would open within 750 feet of a religious facility, even though the Joshua Bible Studies Center actually opened after Young first applied for his special-use permit.

So Young’s attorney, Roger Jon Diamond of Santa Monica, reactivated the suit, which is scheduled to proceed at 9:30 a.m. today with jury selection before U.S. District Court Judge William Rea.

Diamond said the city’s ordinances--and its repeated refusal of Young’s applications--violate his constitutional right to present nude dancing, which has been classified as free speech in a U.S. Supreme Court case.

He has also argued in court papers that the Simi Valley ordinances are too vague, give the Planning Commission and City Council too much power, and put club applicants such as Young at an unfair disadvantage.

Such permits take 94 days or longer to process, while churches and other “sensitive uses” can get permits to open within two days--more than enough time to stymie a strip club application already in progress, according to Diamond.

But Bert Deixler, a private attorney representing the city of Simi Valley, said the city acted “well within established law” and that the Supreme Court has “upheld virtually identical ordinances in similar cases.”