Marksville lifts ban on tattoo parlors
Fri, 09/02/2016 - 05:00
Raymond Daye
Raymond L. Daye
For many years, tattoo parlors were taboo in Marksville. Those wishing to provide or receive “body art” had to do so outside of the city limits.
On Aug. 10, the Marksville City Council lifted that ban and cleared the way for tattoo parlors to locate and operate in Marksville.
The vote was 4-1, with Councilman Frank Havard voting “No” and Mayor John Lemoine -- who is also a voting member of the council -- absent.
The issue was raised by Justin Giallonardo, project manager with D’Argent Companies -- the owner of the Place du Marche shopping center off Tunica Drive.
Giallonardo said he has been approached several times by owners of tattoo parlors who want to open a shop in the city.
The new ordinance states that its purpose is to “regulate tattoo businesses to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the city, and to establish reasonable and uniform regulations for tattoo businesses operated within the city.”
Giallonardo said any lease agreement he would sign with a tattoo parlor would include provisions that they abide by all state laws.
Giallonardo did express a concern with one portion of the ordinance prohibiting a tattoo parlor within 500 feet of a hospital. The issue is whether doctor’s offices located in the shopping center would fall under the definition of “hospital.”
Councilman Mike Gremillion said he personally does not think a doctor’s office would be considered a hospital.
City Attorney Derrick Whittington said that language was taken from another municipality’s ordinance and could be revised or amended if the council decided to.
Mayor Pro Tem Clyde “Danny” Benson, chairing the meeting in Lemoine’s absence, said the council would not entertain drafting ordinances to suit a specific situation.
Giallonardo said he understood that, “and if the doctors’ offices are determined to be a hospital and the 500-foot restriction is part of state law, then so be it.”
However, he continued, if the definition of hospital and/or the 500-foot restriction are within the council’s discretion, he asked for the city’s consideration of his request “since I am the one who brought this issue to you in the first place.”
He said there is no place within the shopping center that would be 500 feet away from the doctors’ offices.
Council members said an amendment to clarify that issue, if needed, would be considered at a later date.
Other aspects of the ordinance defines a “tattoo business” as a “commercial establishment which places markings on the skin of any person with indelible pigments, regardless of the name or description of the establishment or the number of tattoos performed within any given period of time.”
The ordinance includes the state requirement that no person under the age of 18 can enter a tattoo parlor unless accompanied by an adult.
The tattoo parlor can only be placed in a commercial zone and cannot be within 500 feet of a church, school, child care facility, the boundaries of a residential district, a public park, bowling alley, skating rink or public recreation area, hospital or property listed on the National Register of Historic Places or in a state-designated local historic district.
The ordinance notes that if a tattoo parlor locates in the city under the provisions of the ordinance, it will not be deemed “illegal” should a church, school, bowling alley, etc., locate within 500 feet of it at a later date.