1 9/2/2026
RiversideCA.gov1
RiversideCA.gov
Land Use CommitteeSeptember 14, 2026Entertainment PermitsCOMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RiversideCA.gov2
•All entertainment that is open to the public•2-year term, RPD Vice Unit oversees•Application filed with Chief of Police•Chief of Police will issue permit if 8 findings can be made:ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT OVERVIEW1. Complete application2. Accurate application3. No outstanding fees4. Pass background check 5. Proposed entertainment is consistent with laws6. Does not constitute an undue burden on the neighborhood7. Permittee has not been convicted on a felony in past 5 years8. Permittee does not have a history of violating the city code 2 9/2/2026
RiversideCA.gov3
If denial based solely on Permittee’s history of code violations, the Chief of Police can issue the EP if:A. Permittee provides evidence showing the history of violations have been abated and/or will no longer occurB. Permittee agrees to additional terms and conditions during the initial 2-year termC. Permittee previously operated with a Minor CUP or CUPPROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT RiversideCA.gov4
•39 Tier 1 Conditions•If terms violated, Chief of Police may require a meeting with the permittee and affected departments to address the issues. Tier 2 Conditions may be imposed. •Noise: 3 or more noise complaints within a 30-day period•Safety: 3 or more incidents within a 30-day period or single incident involving violence•After 30 days in Tier 2, permittee may request to return to Tier 1. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS 3 9/2/2026
RiversideCA.gov5
•If issues are unresolved within 30 days, or if a major incident occurs, Tier 3 Conditions may be imposed or entertainment permit suspended.•More restrictive noise and safety requirements•After 30 days in Tier 3, permittee may request to return to Tier 1 or Tier 2.•If Permittee continues to violate Tier 3 conditions, Chief of Police may begin revocation proceedings.ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS CONT.
RiversideCA.gov6
•Denial, revocation or suspension of an Entertainment Permit may be appealed consistent with RMC § 1.17.121•Applies to all business permits reviewed by RPD:1. Poolrooms2. Vehicles for hire, taxis, animal-drawn vehicles3. Massage4. Entertainment permits5. Junk dealers and scrap metal recyclers6. Pawn shops and secondhand dealers7. Firearm dealers8. Tobacco retailers9. Adult oriented businesses10. Fortunetelling and occult artsAPPEALS 4 9/2/2026
RiversideCA.gov7
1. Appeal of decision to deny, revoke or suspend a permit must be filed within 10 calendar days of the decision2. Requires a hearing before an Administrative Hearing Officer•Review limited to the issues raised in the written appeal•Permit denial, revocation, or suspension stayed pending a determination 3. Notice of hearing date given in writing; hearing no sooner than 10 days from the date when the notice is served4. Administrative Hearing Officer reviews evidence and hears testimony•Evidence includes police reports, criminal citations, photographs, videos, audio recordings, etc.•City bears the burden of proof to establish the existence of a violation•Preponderance of the evidence used•Each party can cross-examine witnesses and present evidence •Only evidence that is permitted and considered pertains to ownership of the property (if applicable); whether the person noticed is the responsible party; whether a violation of the code occurred and/or continues to occur on the dates specified; and whether the responsible party caused, maintained or permitted a violation of the code on the dates specifiedAPPEALS PROCESS RiversideCA.gov8
5. Administrative Hearing Officer determines whether the appellant violated the code Chapter, or any other relevant law, statute, or code. If the Administrative Hearing Officer concludes the appellant was in violation of the law, the Administrative Hearing Officer upholds the denial, revocation, or suspension the permit.6. The decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer is final.* Could be appealed via judicial review (governed by California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6)APPEALS PROCESS CONT. 5 9/2/2026
RiversideCA.gov9
Code Adoption DatePermit TermAppeal AuthorityApproval AuthorityPermit modelCity2015N/AHearing OfficerPlanning Director with review by Chief of PoliceRegulatory Permit for EntertainmentAnaheim2002As long as there is a valid business tax certificate for the businessHearing OfficerDirector of FinanceEntertainment PermitCamarillo20121 yearCity CouncilCommunity Development DirectorEntertainment PermitClaremont20151 yearCity Manager, then City CouncilChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitConcord20161 yearHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitCovina20252 yearsHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitDavis20251 yearHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitFullerton20001 yearNo appeal for denial of EP; if revoked by Director, can be appealed to City CouncilCity CouncilEntertainment PermitGardena20121 yearHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitHuntington Beach20004 yearsN/ACity CouncilEntertainment PermitLa Mirada2008Administrative review every 2 yearsN/ACity CouncilEntertainment PermitLong Beach19831 yearCity CouncilEntertainment Commission (Appointed by City Council)Entertainment Establishment PermitModesto20201 yearHearing OfficerChief of PoliceLive Entertainment PermitMorgan Hill20171 yearCity CouncilChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitMountain View19961 yearCity CouncilCity ManagerEntertainment Venue PermitOakland20121 yearN/ACity CouncilLive Entertainment PermitParamount20001 yearHearing OfficerCity ManagerEntertainment PermitPico Rivera19961 year for Level 1, 2 years for Level 2Level 1 appealed to the City Manager, Level 2 cannot be appealedPermit Administrator (Level 1) or City Council (Level 2)Level I / Level II Entertainment PermitRedondo Beach20042 yearsHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitRiverside20152 yearsHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment Establishment PermitRoseville20132 yearsHearing OfficerCity ManagerGeneral / Limited / Temporary Entertainment PermitSacramento20001 yearHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment Police PermitSan Diego20024 years; reviewed every 2 yearsHearing OfficerChief of PolicePublic Entertainment PermitSan Jose20131 yearHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitSan Mateo2000N/ACity CouncilPlanning CommissionEntertainment PermitSan Pablo19981 yearHearing OfficerCity ManagerEntertainment PermitSanta Ana19981 yearHearing OfficerChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitSanta Clara19981 yearCity CouncilChief of PoliceEntertainment PermitScotts Valley19716 monthsCity CouncilCity ManagerEntertainment PermitVentura20142 yearsCity CouncilCity ManagerLive Entertainment PermitVista19951 yearCity CouncilMultiple Department signoffs requiredEntertainment Business License and Dance Business LicenseWest HollywoodOTHER JURISDICTION REVIEW RiversideCA.gov10
•30 California cities analyzed: •15 appeal to hearing officer•9 appeal to City Council•1 two-step appeal – appeal to City Manager, second appeal to City Council•3 cannot be appealed because permit approved by City Council•2 have partial non-appeal:•Permit issuance denial by City Council cannot be appealed but revocation by Director can be appealed to City Council •Level 1 permit appealed to City Manager; Level 2 permit cannot be appealed since it is approved by City CouncilJURISDICTION REVIEW SUMMARY 6 9/2/2026
RiversideCA.gov11
1. Clear, consistent appeals process for all PD permits2. Requires understanding of Evidence Code, avoids selective application or enforcement of rules3. Hearing Officer understands how to handle a claim of privilege by the City (ex: use of confidential informant or undercover officer)4. Avoids improper ex parte communications 5. Avoids politicization and claims of bias6. Faster decision makingCURRENT PROCESS BENEFITS RiversideCA.gov12
1. Should staff proceed with scheduling the proposed code amendment to RMC 5.80, originally on the 7/28/26 consent calendar?2. Are there any specific concerns with the current appeals process?3. Should staff analyze other possible appeals processes to determine whether they offer improvements, or should the city maintain its existing process as is?GUIDANCE REQUEST