Loading...
Ord No. 10-17INANCE NO. 10-17 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 118, "SOLICITORS AND PEDDLERS AND DISTRIBUTION OF HANDBILLS", BY AMENDING SECTION 118.13, "HOURS OF SOLICITATION" TO PROVIDE CONSISTENCY AND CONFORMITY WITH CASE LAW; PROVIDING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER SECTION AND SUBSECTION OF CHAPTER 118 SHALL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED; PROVIDING A CONFLICTS CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND AUTHORITY TO CODIFY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the City Commission of Delray Beach finds it necessary and appropriate to amend section 118.13, "Hours of Solicitation," to ensure that the City of Delray Beach's Code of Ordinances is in compliance with case law addressing solicitation curfews within a municipality; and WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court, in Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citi.Zen's Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976), held that commercial speech "that does no more than propose a commercial transaction" is protected by the First Amendment. Id. at 762. The Florida Supreme Court, in Atwater v. Kortum, 95 So. 3d 85, (Fla. 2012), reiterated that "solicitation in a business context is protected commercial speech" and upheld the application of the four prong test to evaluate the constitutionality of a statute regulating free speech as outlined in Central Hudson Gas dam' Electric Cory. v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. 557, 100 S. Ct. 2343, 65 L. Ed. 2d 341 (1980) Atwater at 91 (citing Edenfield P. Fane, 507 U.S. 761, 764, 113 S. Ct. 1792, 123 L. Ed. 2d 543 (1993)); and WHEREAS, an extensive line of authority from the U.S. Supreme Court and numerous federal courts, in addressing the constitutionality of curfew restrictions, has invalidated restrictions on solicitations, vis -'a -vis curfews, as unconstitutional violations of the First Amendment. See Project 80's Inc. v. City of Pocatello, 942 F. 2d 635 (9d' Cit. 1991); City of Watseka v. Illinois Public Action Council, 479 U.S. 1048 (1987); Ohio Citi en Action V. City of Englewood, 671 F. 3d 564 (6`'' Cir. 2012); City of Watseka P. Illinois Public Action Counsel, 796 F. 2d 1547 (7th Cir. 1986); New Jersey Citizen Action v. Edison Townsh p, 797 F. 2d 1250 (3d Cit. 1986); Wisconsin Action Coalition v. City of Kenosha, 767 F. 2d 1248 (7ffi Cir. 1985); and Association of Community Organisations for Reform v. Cite of Frontenac, 714 F. 2d 813 (8t' Cit. 1983); and WHEREAS, the City Commission of Delray Beach desires to establish a constitutionally permissible solicitation curfew that not only protects the privacy of the citizens of Delray Beach, including the private enjoyment of their homes, but also comports with the First Amendment protections afforded to those conducting solicitations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Chapter 118, "Solicitors and Peddlers and Distribution of Handbills", Section 118.13, "Hours of Solicitation", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 118.13. — HOURS OF SOLICITATION. No person, while conducting the activities of a peddler or solicitor, whether licensed or unlicensed, shall enter upon any private property, knock on doors, vend products from motor vehicles or otherwise disturb the citizens of the City of Delray Beach betweeii the i etti!s of 7:00 8:00 , june t] ratiggh Augus-t before 9:00 a.m. and no later than the earlier of thirty (30) minutes after sunset or 9:00 p.m. Section 2. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict be and the same are hereby repealed. Section 3. Should any section or provision of this Ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Ordinance. Section 4. Specific authority is hereby given to codify this Ordinance. Section 5. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and fin g s the 4th day of April, 2017. MAYOR ATTEST: � ' City Clerk First Reading: March 1, 2017 Second Reading: April 4, 2017 2 ORD 10-17