HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD Massage Terminate OrdinanceCITY of Agenda Item No: 5.a
Meeting Date: October 5, 2015
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Community Development
Prepared by: Raffi Boloyan, Planning Manager City Manager Approval:
TOPIC: Consideration of the Temporary Moratorium on Massage Establishments and
whether to Terminate the Moratorium.
SUBJECT: Adoption of an Urgency Ordinance terminating the temporary Moratorium on the
establishment and operation of new massage establishments within the City of San Rafael.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Since the temporary Moratorium on massage establishments was enacted in January 2015, staff has
researched other communities as well as researched potential zoning options to address the
proliferation of massage establishments (especially illicit ones). Based on the research, staff
recommends that zoning changes would not be an effective tool to significantly address the issue. The
issue with massage is related to people who own, work and run a business, not the land use itself. In
this case, zoning is not the best tool to regulate those issues. Zoning is meant to regulate land uses,
not people or business operations. Zoning is meant to address land use impacts (i.e. light, noise, hours
of operation, traffic, parking, land use compatibility). The issue with regulating massage uses is that if
you place two massage establishments, a legitimate one next to one that performs illegal activities,
zoning would consider them the same. The issues are how the operators run their business and
whether they follow sound business practices.
Continued implementation and enforcement of the regulations governing massage establishments in
San Rafael Municipal Code Chapter 10.90 ("the Massage Ordinance") is a more effective tool to
continue to regulate these businesses and ensure that businesses are operating in a legal and safe
manner, consistent with all local and state laws. The City's enforcement efforts for the past 2 years has
proven that implementation of the Massage Ordinance, which includes registration, regular inspections
and enforcement has addressed many of the issues expressed by the Council, the public and the
legitimate massage establishments. In conclusion, staff recommends that based on the study of zoning
options, zoning is not an appropriate tool for the city to use for this specific matter and therefore,
recommends that the temporary moratorium be terminated.
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
File No.: G% —!o -3
Council Meeting: /Dlsi2v�5
Disposition: t 9 3S`
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Paas
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Urgency Ordinance terminating the temporary moratorium on the establishment and
operation of new massage establishments within the City of San Rafael.
BACKGROUND:
At its regular meeting on January 5, 2015, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1928, an urgency
Ordinance temporarily enacting a moratorium on the establishment and operation of new massage
establishments in any zoning district within the City. A massage establishment is a business that offers
massage therapy in exchange for compensation. By its terms, the moratorium did not apply to massage
establishments that were open and operating with required permits prior to the adoption of the
moratorium, to the transfer of such a business to a new owner, or to a new business that had submitted
a complete application to the City prior to adoption of the moratorium.
The moratorium was enacted due to recent changes in State law. With the enactment of Senate Bill
731 (Massage Therapy Act) in 2008, the Legislature attempted to address a concern among massage
professionals about patchwork regulations for massage practitioners and establishments throughout the
State. Prior to enactment of the Massage Therapy Act, local governments in California had broad
authority to regulate massage businesses and massage practitioners operating within their jurisdictions,
including the power under their zoning ordinances to limit the location of massage establishments to
certain zoning districts, and/or to require a conditional use permit to operate. Senate Bill 731 created a
program of voluntary certification of massage practitioners by a State -authorized organization, the
California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC), and additionally imposed limits on the ability of cities
and counties to regulate those practitioners and businesses, in particular by mandating that local
zoning regulations could not distinguish between massage establishments and other personal and
professional services.
After the enactment of the Massage Therapy Act, many communities throughout the state experienced
problems with implementation of the Act, including a significant and unregulated increase in new
massage establishments. The Legislature responded by enacting Assembly Bill 1147, effective as of
January 1, 2015, which extended the Massage Therapy Act but also amended it to once again permit
cities and counties to use their land use and zoning powers to regulate massage establishments
differently than other personal or professional services establishments located within their jurisdictions.
Based on these changes in State law, and ongoing issues in the City with the proliferation of massage
establishments, including illicit establishments, in the downtown area, the City Council determined that
it was prudent to enact a temporary moratorium on the establishment of new massage establishments,
to allow the City to study potential changes to zoning and land use regulations without new massage
establishments opening up that might not be allowed if new zoning rules were ultimately to be adopted.
Therefore, Ordinance No. 1928 was adopted on January 5, 2015 as an Urgency Ordinance, imposing a
moratorium pursuant to the authority of Government Code section 65858. The moratorium was to allow
City planning and legal staff a measured period of time in which to:
• Conduct a thorough review of the impacts of existing massage establishments in various zoning
districts,
• Understand the extensive state law governing the regulation of this use,
• Review the applicability of the City's existing zoning regulations to the use,
• Evaluate regulatory schemes studied and enacted by many other California cities, and
• Evaluate the need for any additional zoning ordinance amendments.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
Ordinance No. 1928 was effective for 45 days and was set to expire on February 19, 2015. On
February 17, 2015, the City Council conducted a noticed public hearing to receive a report describing
Staff's work on the issues being studied during the moratorium, and to consider extending the
moratorium for an additional period of time as permitted under Government Code section 65858. At
this hearing, the Council received input from many massage practitioners and business operators, who
testified about the impacts of the moratorium on legitimate massage establishments and asked that the
City not extend the moratorium, but instead continue to focus its efforts on enforcement of the City's
Massage Ordinance.
Although the City Council was extremely sympathetic to the massage community, it determined that it
would be best to continue the moratorium to allow Staff to complete its work, and therefore adopted
Ordinance No. 1929, which extended the moratorium for an additional 10 months and 15 days, or until
December 31, 2015. However, the Council also directed Staff to report back to the Council at an earlier
date should Staff conclude its research before the December 31, 2015 termination of the moratorium.
Through separate action, the City also adopted changes to the Massage Ordinance (SRMC 10.90) in
December 2014, modifying certain operating and registration standards and requirements. Also through
separate action, the City established fees to cover City staff time for registering and inspecting
massage establishments.
ANALYSIS:
Within the initial 45 days of the moratorium, staff identified the potential zoning options that could be
studied, and reported those to the Council. Since the enactment of the extension of the temporary
moratorium on February 17, 2015, staff has conducted additional research and analysis on potential
options for Zoning Ordinance amendments, and whether any zoning ordinance amendments are
feasible to address the issue of the proliferation of massage establishments and the issue of illicit
establishments.
Staff has reviewed five other similar communities and what they are doing about massage
establishments from a zoning perspective (Attachment B). Additionally, Staff has analyzed 6 different
options for changes to the City's zoning regulations. (Attachment C). Results of these studies are
summarized below and detailed in the attached tables
Comparison of Similar Communities
The cities Staff selected to find out about their massage issues and regulations are San Gabriel,
Huntington Beach, Palo Alto, San Mateo, and Redwood City. These jurisdictions were chosen
for several reasons. San Gabriel is known to have been experiencing a problem with illicit
massage establishments, and recently considered zoning amendments to address massage,
therefore Staff wished to study the changes that city has made to its regulations. The other
cities were chosen because they have demographics similar to San Rafael's in terms of
population size, a good mix of land uses, and thriving downtowns.
Staff's conversations with the five jurisdictions noted above, as well as with the CAMTC,
revealed that most cities have some massage establishments conducting illicit
activities. However, most cities have not expanded their massage regulations beyond statewide
requirements, and as the State Legislature is likely to update these requirements again by the
end of 2016, they are waiting until then to decide whether or not they will adopt revised
massage regulations.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 4
Throughout the state, very few communities have modified their zoning ordinances to require
more restrictive land use regulations associated with massage establishments, as they want to
remain business friendly and do not want to discourage legitimate massage businesses.
Furthermore, most of these communities have also concluded that zoning is a means to
address land use compatibility, and not problematic business practices or operators. San
Gabriel was the only City in California where zoning changes have been made to date.
Lastly, the study of the 5 communities has revealed that most programs are working reasonably
well and usually provide for the enforcement of complaints and violations by massage business
either through the Police Department and/or Building Department.
The attached table (Attachment B) illustrates the results of the survey of other communities.
Most of the communities are not considering zoning options to address this issue. San Gabriel
was having significant problems with massage businesses and adopted a conditional use permit
requirement in March 2015. Their staff indicated that the use permit requirement has addressed
their proliferation issues by reducing the number of new massage establishments due to the use
permit requirement creating financial and time barriers for new massage businesses seeking to
open. However, that requirement has also affected all massage businesses, both legitimate and
illicit establishments, through the creation of additional process and time required for application
for a Use Permit.
San Gabriel also considered a spacing requirement, but found it was too difficult to enforce and
would create an impact on legitimate establishments. Huntington Beach did establish a 1,000 -
foot separation requirement for massage establishments, to spread them out throughout the city
rather than concentrate the businesses. Redwood City, San Mateo, and Huntington Beach have
not adopted a use permit requirement.
Overall, the general consensus of the other five communities studied is that, zoning does not
provide a better tool than an ordinance setting business standards, health and safety standards
and requiring registration and inspections ensure that a business is a legitimate massage
therapy practice. Zoning is meant to regulate land use (i.e. noise, traffic, smell, hours of
operation, parking and compatibility with surrounding uses), not specific business practices.
Therefore, in this case, zoning is not the best tool to regulate business practices or illicit
activities. What a zoning amendment to require Use Permits for all massage establishments
would provide is an additional process and expense for all massage establishments (both
legitimate and illicit) to open and operate in a community. Although the additional process would
have the side effect of discouraging illicit massage establishments from locating in the City, it
would also discourage and impact legitimate operations. The additional Use Permits that would
be submitted if a Use Permit requirement were adopted, would also impact the workload of
planning division staff, and slow down processing of all planning applications.
2. Consideration of Zoning Options
Staff researched six zoning options that could be considered in San Rafael, as noted below
(Attachment C). Each option is described and is followed by a staff summary of the
effectiveness of each:
a. Require Use Permit for all Massage Establishments — Use Permits could be required for
massage establishments in some or all zoning districts to allow the City to evaluate land use
compatibility, hours of operation and concentration/spacing issues. This is not a new tool. At
one time, the City required a Use Permit for all massage establishments.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 5
Staff Analysis — Requiring Use Permits for all massage establishments would allow for
review of spacing and concentration and allow for additional regulation and oversight.
However, this type of regulation and oversight would be geared towards land use matters
(noise, hours of operation, traffic and land use compatibility) only, and would not directly
regulate or prevent illicit activities, which are more effectively controlled with vigorous
enforcement of the City's Massage Ordinance.
The Use Permit requirement would also place additional cost and time requirements on all
massage establishments. From a staffing perspective, requiring Use Permits for all massage
establishments would further strain the capacity of Planning Division staff, which is already
extremely busy, and would therefore impact the timing of processing of all planning
applications, affecting many homeowners and businesses in the City seeking permits for
their projects.
In addition, Use Permits are a land use entitlement, meaning that once issued, the
entitlement runs with the land, irrespective of changes in business ownership. Revoking a
Use Permit is a lengthy process that requires making findings of detriment to public health,
safety and welfare. The revocation process itself does not provide an easier mechanism to
close an illicit business than the current procedure established by the City's Massage
Ordinance of revoking the establishment certificate.
Staff's conclusion is that additional control over land use aspects of massage
establishments through addition of a Use Permit requirement will not substantially advance
the City's primary goal of eliminating illicit massage establishments and practitioners, and
therefore would not justify the substantially increased costs this option would impose on all
massage practitioners and businesses, and City staff.
b. Spacing/Separation requirements for Massage Establishments — Spacing or separation
requirements could be imposed prohibiting new massage establishments from locating
within a certain distance of another massage establishment (e.g., 500 or 1,000 ft
separation). Recently, the City of San Gabriel in Southern California considered an
ordinance establishing spacing requirements, but ultimately did not adopt the standard.
Staff Analysis — This option would reduce the concentration of massage establishments,
limiting both legitimate and illicit operations. However, such a regulation would be difficult to
implement, requiring constant updating of the inventory of massage establishments.
Furthermore, there would be an issue with how to deal with multi -tenant office buildings,
where many massage establishments are commonly located. This option would also have
the high likelihood of opposition from legitimate practitioners and business operators. From
a staffing perspective, this option would create some additional workload for planning staff to
map and monitor all massage establishments in the City.
c. Modify Zoning district land use tables to limit or prohibit massage establishments in
certain zoning districts — Massage establishments could be limited, or prohibited from
certain zoning districts within the City.
Staff Analysis — This option would reduce the areas in which new massage establishments
could operate. However, such a regulation would likely result in concentrating a large
number of massage establishments into certain areas of the City, and might also hamper
enforcement against illicit establishments by putting them in areas that have less visibility
and oversight from public view. Like all other options, this option would not distinguish
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 6
between legitimate and illicit establishments, but would apply to all. Staffing implications of
this option would not be extensive -- mainly the time required to prepare the draft
amendments — and is estimated to be 20-40 hours.
Staff has concluded that this option would not result in a clear improvement over the status
quo and could produce additional undesirable impacts on legitimate practitioners and on the
City's code enforcement efforts.
d. Consider exemption from zoning changes for Sole Providers - Any of the zoning
options noted here could be coupled with an exemption for sole proprietors/sole providers
from Use Permit or spacing requirements.
Staff Analysis — This option would simplify the permitting process for sole providers. This
option could lead to more businesses being formed as sole providers, so as to avert the land
use regulations. This option may face more opposition from legitimate, non -sole provider
establishments.
e. Combination of options above — A likely combination would be to require a Use Permit for
all Downtown massage establishments, including spacing requirements for establishments
not located in multi -tenant office buildings, but not elsewhere in the City.
Staff Analysis — This option would provide an increased level of local control over land use
aspects of a massage establishment, with less risk of concentrating massage
establishments in discrete areas of the City. However, this option would require additional
processing time and application fees. More significantly, as noted above, Use Permits do
not control poor business operations or illicit activities. Although it would create an additional
permit type that the City could revoke, the City already holds the ability to revoke the
massage registration through our existing Massage Ordinance and this would be
duplicative. This option would also impact Planning Division staff time in order to process
Use Permits.
Status Quo with primary reliance on enforcement of existing Massage Ordinance - No
change to the current zoning regulations or maps, which allow massage establishments as a
permitted use in nearly all commercial and mixed use zoning districts. In some downtown
zoning districts, massage establishments are allowed only on a 2"d floor or above or rear
ground level. The status quo also includes on-going implementation and enforcement of the
City's Massage Ordinance.
Staff Analysis — This option would continue the current zoning schemes and regulation of
massage establishments primarily through enforcement of the regulations and procedures in
the Massage Ordinance. The Status Quo option may not completely address neighborhood
or business concerns, and there remains a potential for proliferation. However, during the
moratorium period, efforts to enforce the City's existing massage regulations have proven
effective in addressing the issue of massage establishments that undertake illicit activities,
and have resulted in the closure of 14 establishments that were found to be repeatedly in
violation of the Massage Ordinance.
Status of On -Going Implementation/Enforcement of Massage Ordinance:
The Council will recall that in June, 2013, implementation of the Massage Ordinance was assigned to
the Community Development Department's Code Enforcement Division (from the Police Department).
Given that Community Development did not have the staffing to provide this new service, an outside
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 7
contractor was hired (CSG Consultants) to create and implement the Massage Ordinance registration
and inspection program. This contract was set for a one year trial basis. After the first year, the program
was extended for an additional two years (ending in June 2016). A summary of the program to date
(through September 10, 2015) is provided in Attachment D and summarized as follows.
The City's enforcement efforts began with staff creating an entire program (forms, process, database,
procedures, etc), then inventory all the establishments, and register all existing businesses. However,
once up and running, the City's efforts became effective and regular inspections were conducted.
Since the Code Enforcement Division, through its contractor, has taken over the implementation of the
Massage Ordinance, the City has performed 978 inspections, observed 618 violations of the ordinance,
and issued 218 citations in the amount of $134,564 ($127,094 of which has been collected). To date,
the City has revoked the required massage establishment certificate or operator permit for 3 massage
establishments and closed their operations, and suspended the permit for a fourth, which recently
turned into a full revocation and closure. Overall, City enforcement has resulted, through revocation or
voluntary cessation, in the closure of 14 massage establishments consistently operating in violation of
the City's Massage Ordinance. At this time, the program is continuing and is funded through the end of
this fiscal year (June 30, 2016). Prior to the end of this contract, staff will return to the Council to seek
direction on the future of the program.
Based on Staff's analysis of the zoning options described above, and the results of the enforcement
program, Staff believes that continued enforcement of the City's Massage Ordinance is the more
effective way to prevent illicit operations and that zoning modifications would not be of benefit to the
City.
CONCLUSION:
There have been significant changes in State law in recent years, including the restoration of the City's
powers to impose land use regulations on massage establishments under Assembly Bill 1147.
Moreover, the City's Zoning Ordinance permits the City to foster harmonious and workable
relationships among land uses and reduce or remove negative impacts caused by inappropriate
location of uses. Therefore, the City had a responsibility to all interested persons, including the
operators of existing and proposed massage establishments, potentially affected surrounding residents
and businesses, and the public at large, to conduct a comprehensive study of current massage
establishment land use regulations, and the City's options and feasibility for improving the effectiveness
of those regulations.
The Council adopted this temporary moratorium knowing that, after study, Staff might recommend that
no changes to the City's zoning regulations should be made. As detailed in the report and analysis
above, the research has revealed that zoning is not a beneficial tool in regulating massage
establishments, and that it would be more effective for the City to continue to address the issues related
to massage through the on-going enforcement of the City's Massage Ordinance.
Therefore, staff has prepared, and recommends that the Council adopt, an urgency ordinance
terminating the temporary moratorium on the establishment and operation of new massage
establishments. As an urgency Ordinance, the Ordinance must be approved by a 4/5 vote of the
Council, and would become effective immediately upon adoption.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
Throughout the temporary moratorium, and even beforehand, staff has periodically met with the
massage professionals organized as the Massage Ordinance Advisory Committee (MOAC), to answer
their questions, listen to their comments and concerns and to provide updates. Most recently, staff met
with the leadership of MOAC and the Executive Director of the Downtown Business Improvement
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 8
District (BID) on September 9th, and provided them with the results of the staff research on Zoning
options and an update on the plans for the City Council presentation on September 21St as well as this
hearing.
Notice of this meeting was provided in the City Manager's "Snap Shot" email list, and posted on the
City's web pages related to the massage moratorium. In addition, notice of this public hearing to
consider terminating the temporary moratorium was provided by a notice in the Marin IJ on Saturday
September 26, 2015 (Attachment E) and mailing of public hearing notice to all existing massage
establishments, the Downtown BID, Chamber of Commerce and other interested parties on Friday,
September 25, 2015.
Staff has not received any written or verbal comments as a result of the noticing for this hearing. Any
communication that may be received after the reproduction of the report will be forwarded to the
Council under separate cover.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be no direct fiscal impact of the Council's adoption of the ordinance terminating the massage
moratorium. The only fiscal impact related to the moratorium is the staff time to conduct the research
and analysis and prepare the reports on the matter. It is estimated that 75 hours of staff time have been
used through the moratorium research and analysis and reporting, Fiscal impact of the city's current
and on-going enforcement efforts or future enforcement efforts are or will be addressed through the
staff reports related to those items.
OPTIONS:
The City Council has the following options:
1. Adopt the Urgency Ordinance terminating the moratorium effective immediately (staff
recommendation)
2. Do not adopt the Urgency Ordinance and direct staff to return to the Council prior to the current
expiration date (December 31, 2015) with additional information or analysis.
3. Do not adopt the Urgency Ordinance
extending the temporary moratorium for
December 31, 2015.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
and direct staff to return with a revised Ordinance
1 -additional year past the current expiration date of
By at least a 4/5 vote, adopt an Urgency Ordinance, terminating the temporary moratorium on the
establishment and operation of new massage establishments.
ATTACHMENTS:
Page #
(Stamped)
A.
Draft Ordinance Extinguishing the Temporary Moratorium
9
B.
Table - Comparison of Cities Massage Enforcement
13
C.
Table - Review of Options (Alternative Zoning Options)
17
D.
Status Report on Massage Inspection Program
20
E.
Proof of Publication of Public Hearing Notice
22
ORDINANCE NO. 1935
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
RAFAEL ADOPTED AS AN URGENCY MEASURE TERMINATING A
TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND
OPERATION OF NEW MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS WITHIN THE
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the City Council has broad discretion pursuant to Article III, Sections 16
and 59 of the City Charter; California Constitution Article XI, Section 5; and the general law of
the state, including but not limited to the California Planning and Zoning Law (Gov. Code
§§65000 et seq.), to legislate for public purposes and for the general welfare, including but not
limited to matters of public health and safety; and
WHEREAS, since the 1970's, California Government Code section 51030 has
authorized California cities and counties to adopt ordinances to regulate the business of massage
through a licensing process, and pursuant to such authority, the City of San Rafael historically
has imposed various regulations on massage and/or bodywork offices or establishments
(hereafter "massage establishments") operating within the City. Those regulations are currently
codified as Chapter 10.90 of the San Rafael Municipal Code entitled "Massage Therapy"; and
WHEREAS, in 2008 the State Legislature adopted Senate Bill 731, the Massage Therapy
Act, establishing a new statutory scheme for a voluntary certification program for massage
professionals that would entitle them to rely on a uniform statewide set of occupational
regulations and that would, for massage establishments where all the massage practitioners are so
certified, prohibit cities from imposing special zoning and land use requirements not applicable
to other personal and professional services; and
WHEREAS, since 2010, the City has been regulating massage professionals and
massage establishments in compliance with the Massage Therapy Act, but has nevertheless
continued to receive complaints from members of the public about the growth in the number of
massage establishments within the City, including complaints of their over -concentration and
adverse impacts in the Downtown area; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 1147, which became effective on January 1, 2015, amended
the Massage Therapy Act to restore to cities the authority to use their land use powers to regulate
massage establishments differently than other personal or professional services establishments
located within their jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, with the restoration of the City's ability to regulate massage establishments
through its zoning powers, the City Council determined on January 5, 2015 that it was timely and
important for City staff to undertake a comprehensive study of the City's massage establishment
regulations, and the City's options for improving the effectiveness of those regulations through
new or modified zoning regulations; and by a four-fifths (4/5) affirmative vote of its members
pursuant to Government Code section 65858, adopted Ordinance No. 1928, a 45 -day moratorium
on the establishment of new massage establishments within the City. The Council adopted the
moratorium to allow City Staff to undertake a comprehensive study to: (1) determine the number
and location of existing massage establishments within the City; (2) review and analyze the
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and other laws and regulations applicable to massage
establishments; (3) study and research options for alternative land use regulations; and (4) draft
any recommended new or amended land use regulations governing massage establishments for
consideration by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on February 17, 2015, the City Council found that, despite testimony from
massage establishment owners and practitioners the temporary moratorium was imposing a
substantial burden on their ability to practice their profession in San Rafael, additional time was
required for City staff to thoroughly study the issues related to regulation of massage
establishments and to draft any appropriate amendments to the City's Municipal Code for
consideration by the City Council, and the Council therefore adopted Ordinance No. 1929,
extending the temporary moratorium adopted in Ordinance No. 1928 through December 31,
2015; and
WHEREAS, City staff has now completed the comprehensive study of possible changes
to the City's Municipal Code as required under Ordinance Nos. 1928 and 1929, and has
recommended to the City Council that no changes be made to the City's Zoning Ordinance or
other land use regulations; and
WHEREAS, City staff has recommended that the temporary moratorium imposed by
Ordinance No. 1928 and extended by Ordinance No. 1929 be terminated as an urgency measure,
in order to eliminate immediately any burdens imposed by that moratorium on persons wishing
to practice massage therapy in San Rafael; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that this ordinance effects a minor alteration
to land use limitations and adoption of the ordinance is therefore exempt from the environmental
review requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15305 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of San Rafael does hereby ordain as
follows:
DIVISION 1. FINDINGS.
Pursuant to the provisions of Government code section 65858, the City Council of the
City of San Rafael hereby finds as follows:
1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.
N
2. Based on the recitals above, the City Council hereby finds and determines that the
immediate termination of the temporary moratorium on the establishment and operation of new
massage establishments in San Rafael, adopted by Ordinance No. 1928 and extended by
Ordinance No. 1929, is appropriate and necessary.
3. This ordinance is necessary as an urgency measure to preserve the public peace,
health or safety.
DIVISION 2. TERMINATION OF MORATORIUM.
The temporary moratorium adopted by City of San Rafael Ordinance No. 1928 and
extended by City of San Rafael Ordinance No. 1929, is hereby terminated, effective immediately
upon adoption of this Ordinance.
DIVISION 3. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason,
held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the ordinance and each
section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases are declared invalid.
DIVISION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance is hereby declared to be an urgency measure and shall become effective
immediately upon adoption by an affirmative vote of at least four-fifths (4/5) of the members of
the City Council pursuant to Government Code section 65858. The City Clerk is directed to
publish forthwith a copy of this Ordinance, together with the names of those Councilmembers
voting for or against same, in a newspaper of general circulation publAed and circulated in the
City of San Rafael, County of Marin, State of California. e
G4tf O. PHILLIPS, Mayor
ATTEST:
4�� --- . ,9, ee.-e
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, certify that the foregoing
Ordinance was passed by the City Council of the City of San Rafael, California, by a vote of at
least four-fifths (4/5) of the members thereof, at a regular meeting held on Monday, the 5th day
of October, 2015, by the following vote, to wit:
91
AYES:
NOES
ABSENT:
Councilmembers: Bushey, Colin, Gamblin, McCullough & Mayor Phillips
Councilmembers: None
Councilmembers: None
G • F -R -a P,
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
N.
U
O
O
¢
° Eb S=AN
(� 0 6 O
►? O
^'bU3
O
O
�>
r -
N
4)
UO
Z
N
o
U'Ch
b
�0�
O 4r 00
O
0
N
++
O
M
N
p t 00
Ct
O
�°
EO
,E�
Cq
O
U b b
O
z
cr
FO
Nbo
O
H
o
o
p
N
N
O
O
0 N
N V
I 4
rA
N
O
U "O
O
z
N w
�l
U
EnU)cNV
dd °
N N O U, U
'
_
U
b. m N
N
3 a
UI
cd
s apNC . 42D
U
1
bi"
N
U OO 3
O
N
3.0_.o
v
0O C
p b❑ O• bq +�
c`t
U N
O
Z cd b 3 0— N
>O
4-' 'b O
b4 O N ,b
to
p
Hca 0 U U°
.�
,� N
o
o
Ind
°� 0u g
N rn T N N N rn 'd
bq O
2
O Q N
p C O 4) C13
b C
W pp m
C)
�w��,b
0 d cu v,
z v o w ° 0 o
A o to
c
L41W
°
6
A8
a
W
u
bu
a
3 U b
U
P6,
y
NA;
me
��O L
N.
W
to
m
CL
m
r
z
u,
r
a
U
®
A
aki
U �
b U
A
U
�
d
r�
� .6p
®
C
®
U UO N
O w U CA
QI
.D
>ca
ZMOctl E N
N C
H
p
U U C
U � d
C E
rn 2 U 80 -T
.t.
y:D
v,
4) a rn
2 cd E i
N
N C
N
•,F3
U
L, m.0 3�s E
U (>L)
� p�
Ctl M b •b O
• Vf N i. „p
®U 45
� +�+ O c o
bo-TIryQ� 'd U
U bo V
U "a
C N vl Cj
,1 •>
® cd ;1
E-+ v O oG f°'a b
o Cd
N Vi
® bA G aN vi +j
0Q
a
bo
.b
Qa
® w .0 o .�. ®as
N U
N
ate-.
cdcd
Y C N® p, "O
® U O M d b�A y
o
3 M.5 U n
v1 >> C U) y om, �' ° C
C
U
U
U
C_ >1c/ ® ®CUN
O
C U G� Ed
,a
� 11��N
U Q
ObAvNvq Crn .
w� ^o+C""
CL cd
�>1
�c6Udrn
zU= U
U
od�O
ti2UEtlc0 0.E
N
J^
.
rA c•
v c
Cwi�
yu 0cd
41O rn
W
W
to
m
CL
m
r
z
u,
r
a
� bA
U
ON
.O En
�.
•O
.
O
42 a P
N •'t y
+U+
0
U
Cd
N U Cd
o
O
C
O
Q.
Q
% .O
A
3
GL
U C O
N
bb
C w
C
A
bo �.
b
0.
co
3
a
❑ o. n o
a: Q Q
.
�Q Q
O
q
cd
[ D
C
Cd
"° ❑
H
Ln
� �
O
ca
U
a[i y
00U
y
0
'dbo
O
,N >,
r. O C
�bn
o 3
0 m o
b o
�.
cu o
O
to
2 G
0
N
cid
c`d
O
cn 0
r.
cd
C.
0
N
> 0 4,
E pU 3 2
•°
ca
U
V ^ N
cd �,
�� ° U °'
C
N E
a)
2 En
a°
❑ O a)ca
o a�
.[
ti cd
o . w
N a cd
W;
`)
c
c aEi
-
cd
3
[ ++ U N
C
0cd
b N On
�
A
C y
d
v�
0
o o
0.o
tw
-o
s
cv c �a°' a
y aoi 3
O
Z
C
ao
N 44. �
O❑
� � ccaa � T7
O
O
tn
3
y U
k o •�
i
U
a
En
N
0y
C 41
N
cid U 0
w o
Cd
rn
?
w a
En a) at
in
O
N
" 3 a
-° � ° x
U
C N
q0
b
a>i
o
cd
y
cn U
-0
.w
0 0
o
A
nw°•U
a;
-IZ
En
En
N
C
o
ami
> .0 �,
O r. 0.
cd
cd 0
?�
U
cd
Z
vi
U
a •U
G U .�
b2
Hoffa
w"y��"w
Cd
Q
3�
a c
>,
.c
cd w (2 :.a
O °o a� a
L.
Cd
C U cd
rz
O "
F—
E °�
.D
0
O
y N
cOa Q)
C) °' 3
?, 3 'In
a) —�c O
C
w
a c
cn 03";
o
`oda
E
U 00
tio o
`) W o
L U
0 O
o
.�
z7 cod 0
ca �' un >
Z*" o
a o a
U
H m I ami
U
Q
u 15 'b
y 0.n
y
v, y .Q
�y
a� as
v
o
VWA�=
-41.1 v,
3AW�W
� bA
U
ON
.O En
�.
N
.
'd
N •'t y
+U+
0
U
Cd
N U Cd
O
C
m0 cd
Q.
% .O
bo
bA � O, cd
Cd to
V�1
GL
U C O
N
y 'vi ...r V)
3Cd
5 0
bo �.
co
3
a�0 a a�
❑ o. n o
.
O
q
cd
[ D
C
"° ❑
0 cz
U `�
Ln
O
ca
U
a[i y
00U
y
0
'dbo
O
,N >,
r. O C
�bn
o 3
0 m o
cu o
to
,oV O
0
cid
c`d
O
cn 0
r.
cd
C.
0
N
> 0 4,
E pU 3 2
•°
ca
U
V ^ N
cd �,
�� ° U °'
C
N E
b C
❑ O a)ca
o a�
.[
ti cd
o . w
N a cd
`)
c
c aEi
-
cd
3
[ ++ U N
C
0cd
b N On
cn >,
C y
M
0
o o
0.o
tw
-o
s
cv c �a°' a
y aoi 3
a
C
N 44. �
O❑
� � ccaa � T7
O
tn
3
y U
k o •�
a) U
U� c
t6.
N
c Ei
a+ , G
O
cid U 0
Cd
rn
.�.+ .�
O O >
-0 y
U
N
" 3 a
-° � ° x
aUi
a>i
o
cd
a)
-0
.w
0 0
o
�.�� 0
a;
C
Cuo
O
N
C
o
ami
> .0 �,
O r. 0.
u y X U
y `'
cd 0
6.oo
U> N a)
i
O cd
N
U .w
vi
U
°o
b2
Hoffa
w"y��"w
Cd
Q
3�
a c
.c
cd w (2 :.a
O °o a� a
Q =
Cd
C U cd
rz
O "
F—
Ov
.D
_
+
O
y N
cOa Q)
0cd 0U
a) —�c O
W
a c
cn 03";
o
`oda
E
U 00
tio o
`) W o
=
0 O
.�
z7 cod 0
ca �' un >
Z*" o
0 E
H m I ami
U =>
Q
ICT
v
d0
f0
Q
M
P
d
U
rA
N
En
En
En
ul
O
y
En
O
N
O
•U
O
c�
N
O
rA
O
w
1-4Z
N
..O
0
Q 4
C4
y R7
o
z
ao
U
N
�
0
it
rA
rA
>_.0
�
s o
rA U
y
N N
N cOd
W
Q
Q
ec1
y
UD00
00
1
Vf
N
G�
v1 Q
O
y
bn
N bo
H
I-1
U
3 O
F+
U
3
0
p
En
E
.03
Q
O
Q
En
z >
c'
W
rA Y
G
rA
a�
A.
o
°
o b
a�
Cd �
�co
4)
En
3ri
N 1:
rl
a.
a3
o
U
w bbo
0-0
0
i7
C
O
++
e y
C;Sca
En
. p
O cd
Grn
O En�cd+
L) cdN
N w
W�»)
rr
rA
O
W
rA
..
ld c
curAc
as
M
ia.
rA
0
W
N p�
C O
•O
0
U
En b
�
cr
U
ICT
v
d0
f0
Q
M
_-
rl
a
m
m
CL
U
F -
z
w
S
U
Q
y
y
m _L
0 ... �
0 V 0 0
0
0 �C[
J.,
0 0
.l. C,4 b ' a, yy 3
' ice-.
U
l C
= a.. N rA 0 ti I.. ~"a
y C
y+
y
con
cn cd
y
�~o�a�o��r�a�o��
vn'y..3Uoya.a�d3000c0�a.._
cn
y
to
> .� r, rn
.
>rn
E
O
v
C
�„m
-t- N y ,� cra
0"��rny�
o
rA ._
° ¢
Cy+
Cb4
I
ry,
o
O.
0'�
eO w�
0
O
.rn QN
y0 bq
NyN
OC S
UkO3
O y ;'_
O ey rd
" n a
O
G
0O y
In
o
U.
.arn oIn
0 4.
0w
°
U
0
O 0
00'b4.
°
.0 .O v'O C
>
1�1
O
cd C
rn y ° cn
rn rn fR
y O •b
0
0 0 0
w y .. .4 N a y uCi
N
U
U 4° o .c U 3 a. a
E z°
C O
0 E
4.
Cd .°o
O
N n
'O N
q
"'Cbq
rn
N
E
�..
N0
P. 'C� O
y. U
C +'
O
°
rEE>
6Obo'
N
— OO
Nc;3 cd
yU
cnN
m
'O
E 0 'O
O
O
bA
N
O
o m
C
y
C
W
bl)2g°
tb CA
4°>c
'�
0� ;°'° Cd w5
°N=
O
'~
E -0 c�
aoi w
N O
c o °.3 °~ y a
cd ¢ W 4r
.O a 'C
0
a
4^
S
40 O c�
0 bo'
W
H
C
O w
o cn
cd
Wocy�E
a.
>(u
.= 0. 4
oo
0
E a
0 .0
n ri0
0 v
O0
N
7 0
O d� O
U
O C
(U C b
ny+
v
°-0°cd
°
a
m o
cd
Z
,o °E
>
0E>mc
o
00'
Um
'o
O ,
O
oC aO Cr
0 UES °y' 3 U
2
Ea NN -0C)
E�
co a RQ
E E W
Cd
N
O
3
O
4co
a�
r° ro E o��
r c
O U
>
��°a>io0'3
z
OdCO
O
�rav
rs!
E .5 U O
° o—�'b
a+ 0 n
y
0
O
w
a. j
a�
0
0 Q
41) 0 coE
N
rrn O it O O-0 U
O M.—
o
Z O
'� Cd = .O = C E to Oy
4, w
~
i
rn O
0
y
a.
� � �— O.. ..y-. � o
l
0
� Fes. V 0
OZv)
O co O e
o a�
rn
OAr4id
ami vi a- m N
0 gid._=
0 C o
(D 0
Q -
rl
a
m
m
CL
U
F -
z
w
S
U
Q
45
U, ❑. o b cn 0 }' o
.e o o4°A dwA ca
Zrz O fl N N N wN N bA N °
axe °°'�� Cd
vc. i n
U
° O U p C 0 cd p U o 0
ai b °.`'e G y o mN y c�NF"' aai.
N G'C U .S 'd
v �o o w
cd .5 O b b O °'O -0 ti
cri
°O
° o
N y
U O .0 ¢ U � U (n U
3 bO
.� E 'd � °; 0. E m
co
Ur•i m OSFr Orn -0 rwucan .p Np d y °yN 4rn 3 cda
p iU N En
-b
-UO YO U E� O 0 y 0 u O bo �� p Ln C O
0 3 E m — c> id — • °
co
°' 'Up :�p vi -[ C a• ❑ aU •� vi 0 ° .° , bo r
O O Y° .D N o �
.5 0 .0 0 U. .0
0
bo .0 U
0 �; o o o � v °' ' y • �, o E °' $ E vim, °�3en en 0_' > � v�oi rn
0
o11 00 t 0 o0�o`- to .0o a'd
0 p> . �O�
tn
-+scd Cd ' A 3 3 CS v� En� 3 a 2 , .o E° 3 .E c U 40. c>d Y
° Cd b°n t7 U
0
En
c o rn
`° „ o a8
E3 bo E �
m + fn3U3 E
C o vo 0 0 a 45
o W e
ai a> o
o 0 � o 0 3 Cd Eon E 0.
0aooU F N o
.y C U >y ++ OO
0 0 b[l G 0 c� v,
bD ... cUi ti. Uco O U
y ti p Na
viC U C 0 O
bo 00 M a)
�0. UUan.0 c-0E Uv,
U UU °C
0
En
a o o a• o o d
�3a 3aHEM
�o
bq U y �y+ bi G •0- C
W k+ c U E 0 v°,0 E O
cc E.2A'n 0N a y° O
cn E c a� a, r: 4•+
c CO C E cd-E c c 3° c
r��°oar ero[—�S. tnoOa�N Ego
Z ti ZN a N Z.2 ° b o a� Z
O e.�.» 0 o.� 0 0 b Cd nb 0 a�
a+ `o a o .o a k N o 0 0 o a o �I
OvZxx a 0aa
v
tw
m
a -
z Z
LU
2
U
M
OJ
GO
m
CL
y
A
y N
rn
N
�
v = U
En
Cd N 'd
o
rn •�
AN
N O
.b
'a
CdO b t�,
'
p E U
cd 4
(1)y Gtr
.i O 4•r 3
O
c
v,bo
C
W
° r a4
L. I b
• � � 3 � o
G'.. C
a�
°
� 'd ° ti
cd
°
"%.�
�� 3
�.� gid.° �°
0-
y °',
bo
00
Ej
N
U
y
ca cd
co
o B aa.
cd
0 as Cd c
ro a..5vi
x o
Uo
ca
N
N N
`�
L
y
rn
N
y
rN+
O N
En
C
C
G>
N
N C
Vl d
v1
C
rn
O
Izz E¢
°
-> 0
cyr
En
oo�
.vi
�ow °
°
-0M N
'm
NN>
°
,jo on
0
Gtr ++
�
.. NCd
cd -=
N
Cp y
N id
GL
°4.
o y
cd
TJ
�'
3 c
b0
'm
�°
a�
0 0
to
c:
C
'3 '�+.�
C
0>
N
4r
Ln
43
rn
U 3
n 0
�nEn
[A
N
G
O
Uy
N
C
N
E
tn
rn
cd
N
4-.
G4
U
d)
a�
>
ani
L
Cd0.
Cd
•
W
C
S
bA
y
,n O
-Cy y
Cs
ca�
w=a,
00 0
.c
yCdC
� c«r
cd 0
A
E
a) rn
°
M
OJ
GO
m
CL
Massage Inpection Program (MIP) Data Summary
For Date Range: 2/17/2015 to 9/2412015
Businesses Registered
Businesses Pending
Businesses Closed
Businesses Revoked
Businesses Closed due to
City Action
Businesses Suspended (Current)
Inspections Performed
Violations Observed (see below)
Citations Issued
Citations Issued $
Citations Paid $
0
6
2
5
0
334
105
21
$16,437.50
$29,266.65
Current Registered CMPs: 189
Violations from 2117/2015 to 9/24/2015
Since Program Inception
Businesses Pending
3
Businesses Closed
32
Businesses Revoked
3
Businesses Closed due to
11
City Action
5
Businesses Suspended
3
Ever
1
Current Suspended
0
Inspections Performed
978
Violations Observed
618
Citations Issued
218
Citations Issued $
$134,564.06
Citations Paid $
$127,094.06
Violations -CITED
8
Beds; Residential use; Sleeping; Prohibited
11
Employee Attire: Transparent, See-through
5
Exposure Prohibited
5
Patron Genitals; Draping Required; Contact Prohibited
5
Display of PermitlCert. & I.D. on CMT & Rec. Area; Req.
3
Interior Doors; Locks prohibited
3
Main Entry Door, Reception Area & Unlocked Entry; Req.
3
Rooms, tubs, showers, sanitized afer each use
3
Services & Costs; Posting Required
3
Employment of Non -Certified Practitioner
2
Patron & Visitor clothing; Nudity, underclothing intimate apparel; prohibited
2
Visitors in areas other than Reception Area or toilets; Prohibited
2
Certification by California Massage Therapy Council required for practitioner:
1
Certification by CMTC required for practitioners.
1
Employment of Non -Listed practitioner
1
Exterior Windows; Obstructions Prohibited
1
Operation of Establishment without Valid Certificate or Pemit; Prohibited
1
Sanitary Towels; Closed Receptacles & Cabinets Required
1
Violations -NO STATUS SELECTED
Exposure Prohibited 1
Patron Genitals; Draping Required; Contact Prohibited 1
Services & Costs; Posting Required 1
Violations -Non-Compliance
Beds; Residential use; Sleeping; Prohibited 1
Violations -WARNED
Display of Permit/Cert. & I.D. on CMT & Rec. Area; Req.
8
Beds; Residential use; Sleeping; Prohibited
5
Visitors in areas other than Reception Area or toilets; Prohibited
5
Compliance w/Building & Fire Codes Required
3
Containers; Contamination; Labeling; Closed
3
Lighting in Massage Rooms; equivalent to at least one (1) 40 -watt light; requii
3
Cleanliness; Proper Disenfecting
2
Combs; Disenfecting Required
2
Display of Permit & Certification — On -person & Reception Area
2
Employment of Non -Certified Practitioner
2
Main Entry Door, Reception Area & Unlocked Entry; Req.
2
Services & Costs; Posting Required
2
NOTE: Business Closed # includes Revoked and Closures due to City Action
Thursday, Septen
MIPDatabyDate.rpt
Violations -WARNED
Employment of Non -Listed practitioner 1
Front Door/Reception Area Required; One patron -entry Door Allowed 1
Interior Doors; Locks prohibited 1
Laundering requirements; 140 degrees fahrenheit, etc 1
Liquids and creams: clean, uncontaminated, closed, containers; required 1
Patron & Visitor clothing; Nudity, underclothing intimate apparel; prohibited 1
Patron Genitals; Draping Required; Contact Prohibited 1
Sanitary Towels; Closed Receptacles & Cabinets Required 1
Shower Footwear, and Disenfecting Required 1
NOTE: Business Closed # includes Revoked and Closures due to City Action
Thursday, septen MIPDatabyDate.rpt
You are invited to attend the City Council hearing on the following project:
PROJECT: Termination of Temporary Moratorium on New Massage Establishments -
Consideration of an Urgency Ordinance Terminating a Temporary Moratorium on
the establishment and operation of new massage establishments within the City of
San Rafael; File No.: P14-018
As required by state law, the project's potential environmental impacts have been assessed
This urgency ordinance terminating the temporary moratorium will not have a signi0cant
e fiect on the environment sitrce the ordinance effects a mirror alteration to land use limitations,-
therefore
imitations,therefore adoption of the ordinance is exetnpt from the environmental review requirements of
the California Eirvironmental Quality Act (CE -QA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15305.
HE G DATE: Monday, October 5, 2015 at 7:00 P.M.
LOCATION:
San Rafael City Hall - City Council Chambers
1400 Fifth Avenue at "D" Street
San Rafael, California
WHAT WELL
You can comment on the project. The City Council will consider all public testimony and
HAPPEN:
decide whether to adopt the urgency ordinance terminating the temporary moratorium.
IF YOU CANNOT
You can send a letter to the Community Development Department, Planning Division, City of
ATTEND:
San Rafael, 1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901. You can also hand deliver it prior to
the meeting.
FOR MORE
You can view the staff report after 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday before the meeting at
INFORMATION:
htto://www.cityofsanrafael.orWmeetings. More information on the current moratorium can be
found at www.cityofsanrafael.org/massage
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Esther Beime
Esther Beime
CiTY CLERIC
At the above time and place, all letters received will be noted and all interested parties will be heard. If you challenge in court the matter
described above, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered at, or prior to, the above referenced public hearing (Government Code Section 65009 (b)
(2))•
Judicial review of an administrative decision of the City Council must be filed with the Court not later than the 900 day following the
date of the Councils decision (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6)
Sign Language and interpretation and assistive listening devices maybe requested by callbig (415) 485-3085(voice) or (415) 485-3198
(TDD) at least 72 hours in advance. Copies of documents are available in accessible formals upon request.
Public transportation to City Hall is available through Golden Gate Transit, Line 22 or 23. Para -transit is available by calling
Ifihistlestop Wheels at (415) 454-0964.
To allow individuals with environmental illness or multiple chemical sensitivity to attend the meeting/hearing, individuals are requested
to refrain from wearing scented products.
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
You are invited to attend the City Council hearing on the following project:
PROJECT: Termination of Temporary Moratorium on New Massage Establishments -
Consideration of an Urgency Ordinance Terminating a Temporary Moratorium on
the establishment and operation of new massage establishments within the City of
San Rafael; File No.: P14-018
As required by state law, the projects potential environmental impacts have been assessed.
This urgency ordinance terminating the temporary moratorium will not have a significant
effect on the environment since the ordinance effects a minor alteration to land use limitations;
therefore adoption of the ordinance is exempt from the environmental review requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15305.
HEARING DATE: Monday, October 5, 2015 at 7:00 P.M.
LOCATION: San Rafael City Hall „- City Council Chambers
1400 Fifth Avenue at "D" Street
San Rafael, California
WHAT WILL You can comment on the project. The City Council will consider all public testimony and
HAPPEN: decide whether to adopt the urgency ordinance terminating the temporary moratorium.
IF YOU CANNOT You can send a letter to the Community Development Department, Planning Division, City of
ATTEND: San Rafael, 1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901. You can also hand deliver it prior to
the meeting.
FOR MORE You can view the staff report after 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday before the meeting at
INFORMATION::�j�://��������_,i�«f`<<��;k�ik����l.��c/��i���<<„More information on the current moratorium can be
found at wv� tvofso� ir�ior.,,hi
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Esther Beirne
Esther Beirne
CITY CLERK
At the above time and place, all letters received will be noted and all interested parties will be heard. If you challenge in court the matter
described above, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered at, or prior to, the above referenced public hearing (Government Code Section 65009 (b)
(Z))•
Judicial review of an administrative decision of the City Council must be Fled with the Court not later than the 901h day following the
date of the Council's decision. (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6)
Sign Language and interpretation and assistive listening devices may be requested by calling (415) 485-3085 (voice) or (415) 485-3198
(TDD) at least 72 hours in advance. Copies of documents are available in accessible formats upon request.
Public transportation to City Hall is available through Golden Gate Transit, Line 22 or 23. Para -transit is available by calling
Whistlestop Wheels at (415) 454-0964.
To allow individuals with environnrewal illness or multiple chemical sensitivity to attend the meetingAuearing, individuals are requested
to refrain from wearing scented products.
For publication in the Marin IJ on Saturday, September 26, 2015
ROUTING SLIP / APPROVAL FORM
INSTRUCTIONS: Use this cover sheet with each submittal of a staff report before approval
by the City Council. Save staff report (including this cover sheet) along
with all related attachments in the Team Drive (T:) 4 CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEMS 4 AGENDA ITEM APPROVAL PROCESS 4 [DEPT -
AGENDA TOPIC]
Agenda Item # S 0�-
Date of Meeting: 10/5/2015
From: Raffi Boloyan
Department: CDD
Date: 9/24/2015
Topic: Consideration of the Temporary Moratorium on Massage Establishments and whether to
Terminate the Moratorium.
Subject: Adoption of an Urgency Ordinance terminating the temporary Moratorium on the
establishment and operation of new massage establishments within the City of San Rafael.
Type: ❑ Resolution M Ordinance
❑ Professional Services Agreement ❑ Other:
APPROVALS
® Finance Director
Remarks: no financial impact
® City Attorney
Remarks: LG -Approved 9/24/15 with minor changes to staff report.
® Author, review and accept City Attorney / Finance changes
Remarks: Changes made/accepted into document and signature added
® City Manager
Remarks:
Esther Beirne
From:
Stacey DeGooyer <
Sent:
Friday, October 02, 2015 11:09 AM
To:
Esther Beirne
Cc:
Fritzi Schnel; marc. mike.mcguire@sen.
susan.bonilla@asm. jerry.
Subject:
Support to end massage moratorium (San Rafael)
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Dear Mayor Phillips and Council Members,
Please vote to end the moratorium on massage establishments.
I would like to commend the City Staff for their dedication and diligence to
• studying the tools for mitigating prostitution
• enforcing the current code and
• being fiscally mindful.
The San Rafael City Staff's thorough study shows that land use and other blanket barrier -to -
entry restrictions are too costly (both in time and money) and do not control poor business
operations or illicit activity. Specifically, CUPs do more harm than good.
Land use restrictions are a lose -lose proposition because:
1. it costs cities staff time and directs their limited hours and resources away from code
enforcement,
2. it costs massage therapists additional fees and time that are not required by the City of
other healing arts and personal services professionals,
3. it favors large massage establishments (franchises, spas, etc) over small businesses
and
4. perhaps the most unintended consequence - it is not a deterrent for any illicit business
because an illicit business can navigate the expense and the process.
San Rafael has prioritized code enforcement and the results have been
effective. Keeping a consistent vigilance on the businesses with code violations and
recouping program costs via inspections and fines for infractions does discourage problematic
businesses and specifically addresses the illicit businesses.
Massage therapists provide important health and wellness benefits to our clients. Please look
at the following link and consider how you or your family and friends have been or may be
helped) by massage: pp p
u Y J � " � .„ r�u� rvll a i�� ,°« d p � q..N Y� �a .V u � w mmN� V,�u�u ..n a Jrv: f,.�. ✓r; 5 reasons "uu1:::I rv;"����.,,e_
Please vote YES to end the moratorium and re -open the door for quality massage providers
to offer their skills, caring and nurturing touch to their fellow citizens.
Sincerely,
Stacey DeGooyer, CMT
CAMTC #41228
cc: Massage Ordinance Advisory Committee
Assembly Member Marc Levine,
Senator Mark McGuire, '
Assembly Member Susan Bonilla, Chair B&P, '
Senator Jerry Hill, Chair B&P,
- � � -.. -
i
k�• MaYamta
amencan massage therapy association'
fl
October 2, 2015
To: Mayor Gary Phillips
Council Member Kate Collins
Council Member Andrew McCullough
Council Member Maribeth Bushey
Council Member John Gamblin
Dear Mayor Phillips, Council Members and City of San Rafael Staff,
On behalf of the California Chapter of the American Massage Therapy Association, I am
writing this letter in support of your Urgency Measure Terminating a Temporary
Moratorium on the Establishment and Operation of New Massage Establishments
within the City of San Rafael.
We admire the diligence and fair-mindedness with which the City of San Rafael staff has
investigated, and the Mayor and Council deliberated, on the proper means for regulating
the practice of massage in the City of San Rafael while giving city departments and law
enforcement the tools necessary to combat prostitution and the threat of human
trafficking taking place in the city.
This approach assures that your citizens will have access this valuable health care
discipline, and we strongly support the Mayor and City Council in supporting this
motion and terminating the moratorium.
Sincerely,
Tony Siacotos, CMT
Government Relations Chair
a nita cafiPorniat chapter
28 .1.4 ( <ar diaa.ad Du h e, d,imDv dn, ( k 95648
ph. 800,696,2682
wamaaaa. aarn d a- c,aa a a rg
Rhonda Lynn Kutter, CMT
CAMTC # 15625
October 2, 2015
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
MOAC supports the staffs recommendation to end the moratorium.
The massage establishment moratorium was put into place last January for staff to conduct land use
studies. The studies are now complete as you can see from the staff report. Staff has done a very
thorough job researching this issue and compiling their information with input from the community
and from the Massage Ordinance Advisory Committee.
MOAC concurs with the report and we strongly recommend that the Council lift the massage
moratorium now and not impose any additional land use requirements, conditional use permits,
spacing restrictions, etc., since this is not a zoning issue. Illegal activities are the issue.
San Rafael has already proven its ability to eliminate problem businesses by implementing a well
thought out massage program, starting with a strong massage ordinance now enforced consistently and
continuously. The massage ordinance, along with many other health and safety regulations, requires
all massage providers to be certified by the California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC).
To recap, increasing the cost of entry for a massage business by adding CUP's etc., has never been
shown to be an effective deterrent to illegal activities. Additional fees and land use requirements
actually favor criminals who can afford the fees, delays and legal costs. Plus these requirements
discourage therapeutic massage professionals.
Many honest hard working individuals have been harmed directly and indirectly due to this
moratorium. The moratorium is no longer necessary and has served its purpose. Please vote to remove
the moratorium on new massage establishments in the City of San Rafael on October 5th.
As always, we would be happy to answer any questions.
Sincerely,
Rhonda Kutter, CMT
Chair, Massage Ordinance Advisory Committee
cc: Assembly Member Marc Levine,
Senator Mark McGuire,
Assembly Member Susan Bonilla, Chair B&P,
Senator Jerry Hill, Chair B&P,