The opening paragraph, titled “Purpose,” of Minneapolis’s “Sexually Oriented Uses” ordinance reads as follows:
It is recognized that there are some uses which, because of their very nature, are recognized as having serious objectionable characteristics, thereby having a harmful effect upon the use and enjoyment of adjacent areas. Special regulation of these uses is necessary to insure that these adverse effects will not contribute to the blighting or downgrading of the surrounding neighborhood. These special regulations are included in this article. (Article IV, Chapter 549, Title 20)
Were it not for the heading, “Sexually Oriented Uses,” one might wonder what, exactly, is being discussed here. What constitutes a use that, “because of [its] very nature,” is objectionable, harmful, the antithesis of enjoyment, and, if left unchecked, could result in neighborhood ruin?