04-18-1960 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ordinance No.NS-~46 Repealing Municipal Code Sections 4231 and 4232 (resorting) 'This being the date set for the second reading of an Ord~fnance repealing Santa Ana Municipal Code Sections 4231 and 4232, Reverend J. Warner~ Parkview Reformed Church, 2031 So. Olive Street, inquired if the elimination of these two Sections make Police enforcement more difficult, and if portions are to be deleted or obso- leted, ~ill substitute Sections be provided? Councilman Gould replied the law is still the same and unfortunately the press carried a misnomer, and after reading the two Sections stated that all of the Sections relating to prostitution are in the Penal Code of the State of California. Councilman Heir~ly stated it would pre-~ clude the Pblice Department from taking such action as it affects the rights of individuals, in a room of their choosing, without being disturbed by the Police Department. Austin Ormond, 710 So. Ross Street~ and approximately ten people stood in support of Reverend Warner. Mr. A. J. Ecoff, 210 W. Santa Clara Avenue, inquired why the two Sections are being deleted at this time. Councilman Mainly replied the Judges had actually ruled "not guilty" of violating this law where arrests had been made. Councilman Gould pointed out he had been in court on threeI of such cases and the Judges failed on one or two actions because this law is not constitlltio~al or right. Councilman Brewer explained he was ill-advised in ini- tiating the repeal of these Sections and was sorry that there was so much publicit~ concurrently in this behalfj since the press had misrepresented the intention of these Sections. Councilman Heinly stated our present laws ~re archaic, obsolete and unconstitutional and should be replaced. Councilman Hubbard stated the Ordinance is unconstitutional and he could not support an unconstitutional law. Mayor Hall stated Santa Ana has always been a conservative place to live in, an~ it is very important that we maintain a good reputation. If we relax our laws~ we will have a tendency to throw our town wide open. In removing this enforcement, we make it practically impossible to change the laws in the future. I am not for relaxing these conditions and do not agree with the repeal of these Sections. Chief of Police Edward J. ~llen stated this would be a very definite curtailment of our efforts to stamp out prostitution, which has changed its tactics ovor the years with the advent of motels and taverns. We are in the vicinity of a vast military camp at E1 Toro, and it is our duty to protect public safety and pub] ic health, because of the venereal diseases involved. ~Je have had no objections from the Judges about the law, but we have had comments to the contrary. If the law is un- constitutional, it should be submitted to a Judicial body to see if it is unconsti tutioual. Councilman Gould read Penal Code Sections 316 and B18. Reverend Glenn McFarlaud, 522 E. Chestnut Street, stated he had talked ~ith many young people - boys and girls - and it is nV purpose to teach them what is right and good. If in', repealing th~se Ordinances our youngsters w~31d not have the protection they need from those influences, then we ask that the Sections be revised; if it is uncon- stitutional, we are in favor of it being revised~ but to repeal these Sections would seem to be relaxing these laws and bringing in those influences that could confront our youngsters. Reverend Garland Lacey, Minister of the Wilshire Presby- teriah Church, stated it ~*as his belief the m~mbers of the City Council were trytr~ to have a very fine City, and I am sure that Chief Allen wants the same. I believ~ the laws on our statute books are sufflcient, but the general public has taken hold of this and it ~ill be the decision of the members of the City Council to make sat~ factory disposition of the matter. Councilman Brewer has done a magnificent thing