HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/2002 Adjourned Meeting / Study Session 41
CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
ADJOURNED MEETING /STUDY SESSION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 4, 2002 - 7:30 A.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL
1. ROLL CALL
Present:
Council: Mayor Mary Place, presiding, Council Members Clarence Barnett,
Lynn Buchanan, Paul George, Larry Mattson, John Puccinelli, and
Bernard Sims
Staff: Dick Zais, City Manager; Helen Harvey, Assistant City Attorney; Bill
Cook, Director of Community and Economic Development; Doug
Maples, Planning and Code Administration Manager; Bruce Benson,
Senior Planner; and City Clerk Roberts
Also: Ken Harper, Consulting Attorney
2. CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION OF CASINO ISSUES
• Purpose of Study Session
Council Member George said that he asked for this study session because of
remarks made at a recent public hearing that the state had pre - empted the city
rights regarding gambling in the city. He took exception to that and went to the
Washington State Gambling Commission Website and found six pages of names
of cities and counties that have exercised control either through zoning,
moratoriums, or by banning casinos. He wanted to study the City's authority to
regulate the expansion of gambling, particularly the mini - casino's location. He
hopes that the City establishes a policy on any future application for mini - casinos.
• Questions and Answers
Council Member Barnett stated he thinks we need a decision from Legal on the
absolute ban regarding the either /or clause. The materials show the choices are
to allow card rooms or you have an absolute abolishment. However, he
understands that several of the bans have been referred to the Superior Court
and that various city attorneys do not agree with the ruling of the Attorney
General's memo. The Gambling Commission does not agree with the opinion of
some city attorneys.
Assistant City Attorney Harvey stated that attorney Ken Harper has done research
on this issue. Ken Harper said that Council's concerns are well founded because
the matter of local control over gambling is not crystal clear. It is clear that
municipalities don't have control over the internal regulatory control of gambling.
The gambling commission has authority over the rules. The Gambling
42
JUNE 4, 2002 — ADJOURNED MEETING
Commission has not ruled on where mini - casinos may locate; that is zoning. The
state law says that cities may absolutely prohibit but cannot change the scope of
the license. It is not clear what they may absolutely prohibit, and that is where the
ambiguity creeps in. Once you exhaust the language of the statute, you have to
go to other sources for guidance. There is a 1999 Attorney General memo written
as an early effort to come to grips with how far municipalities could go on this
absolutely prohibit clause. The Assistant Attorney General construes the absolute
prohibition to mean that municipalities have very limited authority to zone
gambling. There are five different types of local land use ordinances from
licensing card rooms, which they say is inappropriate because they are licensed
by the state; moratoria on new license; moratoria on new activities; zoning against
gambling activities in certain areas; and zoning against activities that support a
gambling activity. He found it unlawful for municipalities to license gambling
casinos on their own. The Attorney General Office's memo is a little Tess clear on
all the other options. The memo finds it to be a pre - emption concern about local
zoning of gambling facilities. It is not known what that preemption doctrine means
in court. It really means that municipalities have very little authority, including
moratoria. The Assistant Attorney General admits it is a nuance of the law. If the
Gambling Commission has made those establishments available for a license,
that is the pre - emption of the field and the city does not have the authority to put
that potentially licensed establishment in a certain zone or deny it altogether. You
have only the option to absolutely prohibit or you must allow it entirely. After this
memo came out it met with some surprise with some folks in the state.
Traditionally, the local municipal's authority to zone is one of the key aspects of
local power. It would be good if the legislature would step in and tell us what the
statute means. The reason it has not been clarified is because a lot of
municipalities believe they have this authority already and have not wanted to
push for clarification of the statute. Where you have a direct conflict between local
ordinances and state law, the state law takes precedence.
Council members asked Mr. Harper questions concerning legislation by other
entities to ban or zone gambling casinos and if the court has made a decision on
any that have been appealed. Mr. Harper referenced two cases he knows about
and commented that he has not heard about any ruling made by the court.
• Council Member Puccinelli stated it is his understanding that once an
establishment has a gambling license for any activity, such as pull -tabs, they can
easily obtain an enhanced card room license with the Gambling Commission. He
asked if the Council could make a determination that the zoning is not correct for
the enhanced gambling activity. Mr. Harper responded that once an establishment
has a license from the Gambling Commission, you couldn't regulate them.
Council talks about Moratoria and Class 3 Review
Council Member George stated that it was never his intention to talk about an
absolute ban; but this discussion brings us to what he would like to see. He would
like a six -month moratorium so we could discuss this issue. He also suggested
that we should have a member of the gambling commission at a future study
2
JUNE 4, 2002 — ADJOURNED MEETING
session. He understands that once they get a license they can piggy back on that
license and gambling commission can locate that casino anywhere they want.
Mayor Place asked what would it take for us at this point to require a Class 3
review of any casino. Council Member Barnett stated he discussed that yesterday
• with staff and they indicated that could be put on a fast track to get it
accomplished. Doug Maples reported that it would go through the zoning
ordinance amendment process and be taken to the Regional Planning
Commission (RPC), and once they make a recommendation to the Joint Board, it
would then come to this body.
•
Bruce Benson, Senior Planner, stated that Council Member Barnett had asked
him how quickly this would be done. It would require a hearing through the RPC
and go through the notification process. It would go through the Joint Board and
then it would come back to Council. City Manager Zais estimated that we are
probably looking at 90 days if this were the only item that is being processed.
Discussion ensued on items that need further study and consideration:
. • Does Class 3 review automatically limit casinos from being near residential
areas, or near parks and schools?
• Need to define card rooms and game rooms in the Yakima Municipal Code
and the updated definition would have to go through the review process
• Consider exempting charitable organizations
• Do further research of some of the things that seem to be legal for cities to
regulate: parking standards, increasing the taxes paid on gross revenue and •
prohibition against all new card rooms or casinos
• Several of the jurisdictions established a sunset clause for existing gambling
establishments. They would enter into an agreement to allow the business to
continue for a period of time based on the amortized value of their business
rather than require it to go out of business immediately. Mr. Harper gave his
advice that this could cause a lot of problems, however, Council wanted
additional discussion.
• The map on display shows the location of the four card room casinos with 500'
and 1,000' circles and where a 500' circle around parks and schools would be
established. Can compatibility issues with parks, schools or residential areas
be considered?
• The Attorney General's Office would likely find regulating some of the
activities related to gambling to be acceptable, i.e. alcohol sales.
• Suggestions and Remarks Made by the Hearing Examiner
Phil Lamb made the following remarks and suggestions:
• It is logical for Council to adopt a moratorium to have time to come up with a
definition that includes mini casinos and expanded gambling activities
• It would have to be run through the RPC and it would apply the
urban area.
• It could be a Class 3 use in the four zoning districts
• Class 3 review consists of a public hearing and a substantive review of the
application
3
44
JUNE 4, 2002 — ADJOURNED MEETING
• With respect to compatibility: 1) how do you evaluate compatibility? 2) What
factors to consider and what weight is it given? And, 3) When do we consider
it?
• The Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance have created several zones
and defined what is compatible with those zones. When you consider
compatibility, you could consider the proximity and impact of the uses
adjoining to parks or churches. These factors would not be specific to
gambling.
Mr. Lamb stated he could not be at this afternoon's meeting when Council will
consider an item to set a date of hearing before him for the Congdon rezone. He
wanted to take the opportunity of the open, televised forum to state that he will not
grant a request to move this hearing date from June 24 to July 9. He stated the
hearing could be continued on beyond that date if necessary.
• Council Takes Comments from the Audience
Lynn Raymond, 2302A West Viola, spoke as co -chair of the Committee for
Family Friendly Yakima, and asked Council Member Puccinelli to recuse himself
from this discussion. Council Member Puccinelli clarified that at the previous
meeting Council was in a quasi - judicial role; today he is representing his
constituents as a council member and did not feel the need to be recused
because Council is talking about gambling in general and not about a specific
application. Ms. Raymond continued, stating that Yakima needs to ban any more
mini- casinos either through a moratorium or an outright ban. She provided
Council with a report about gambling.
Lois Gervais, 4204 Scenic Drive, co -chair of Committee for Family Friendly
Yakima, agreed with Ms. Raymond on the issue of Council Member Puccinelli
needing to recuse himself since he announced that he was interested in
establishing a mini - casino in his former restaurant. She quoted from U.S.
Attorney General John Ashcroft's statement that gambling is not an industry, but a
parasite; taking money from the poor and redistributing it to the promoters and a
few winners.
Charlotte Baldwin, 1311 Butterfield Road, spoke in support of a total ban on
casinos.
Cathy Mickels, 103 North 87 Avenue, supported a ban on casinos and asked
Council to join 54 other cities in the state that prohibit or limit casinos.
Eric Walls, Chairman for Yakima Police Patrolman's Association, spoke against
the ban on casinos. He stated that this is a good source of revenue for the City,
particularly for the Police Department. With additional revenue, we could put more
officers on the street and reduce overtime costs for the city. Officers are unable to
take time off because there is no one to replace them. Speaking for himself, he
stated that when he takes his children to the park he would be more worried about
a drive -by shooting than he would be about gambling going on across the street.
City Manager Zais stated that the revenue from gambling taxes is not exclusively
4
45
JUNE 4, 2002— ADJOURNED MEETING
devoted to the Police Department's budget, but it is our view that it is criminal
justice related revenue.
Barry Tyes, 426 South 43 Street, stated he is dead -set against gambling.
Carl Willcoxson, commented that he has listened to the religious people say that
the city is over- saturated with casinos. However, there is only a handful of
casinos, compared to eight pages of church listings in the phone book; churches
that don't pay revenue to the city. He stated the Council should give business a
chance.
Jill Ballard, 1505 South 6 Avenue, spoke against a ban on casinos. She stated
that security at casinos is high and she feels safer at a casino than in some other
businesses.
Jar Arcand, citizen, observed that our city is threatened by gambling and we
don't have ordinances or zoning to protect us. He spoke about the history of
gambling in Washington State, much of which was illegal until 1997. He stated
that the City of Sunnyside voted yesterday to place a six -month moratorium on
gambling. The fact that Yakima doesn't have zoning regulations in place gives us
the right to establish a moratorium. Council Member Barnett asked Mr. Arcand if
he is including all gambling activities in his request for a moratorium, such as
bingo, pull tabs, etc. Mr. Arcand stated there should be a difference between for -
profit and non-profit organizations.
• Council's Concluding Discussion and Directions to Staff
Council Member George recommended Council consider a moratorium, discuss
the issue and develop some definitions, then conduct a public hearing. We could
have an ordinance issuing a moratorium available for Council's consideration at
the June 18 Council meeting. Council Member Puccinelli stated he would like to
see the moratorium be for house - banked card games. GEORGE MOVED AND
MATTSON SECONDED TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE
FOR THE JUNE 18 MEETING THAT WOULD ADDRESS A SIX -MONTH •
MORATORIUM ON HOUSE - BANKED MINI CASINOS. Helen Harvey reported
that state statues require a public hearing in advance or within six months of the
moratorium. Council Member Barnett expressed his opinion that an additional
study session is needed before a moratorium is passed. We received input but we
have not had the opportunity to really discuss it among ourselves.
City Manager Zais presented Council with a couple of options.
1) Council could continue the study session; ask that legislation be prepared for
review at the study session and then consider the legislation at a future Council
meeting; or
2) Council could call for a public hearing at the time the ordinance is scheduled on
the agenda.
5
•
46 ,
JUNE 4, 2002 — ADJOURNED MEETING
The question was called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried by 6 -1
voice vote; Barnett voting nay. It was the consensus of the Council to have a
study session next Tuesday morning on this same subject prior to the June 18
Council business meeting. Ms. Harvey stated that staff would prepare a draft
ordinance declaring a moratorium for Council's review at the study session.
Mayor Place asked what would happen with any applications that would be filed
between now and the passage of the moratorium. Following discussion,
Mr. Harper concluded that it may be possible for the Gambling Commission to
delay the approval of an application; however, if a completed application comes in
tomorrow, he is not sure that an administrative hold would keep someone from
having standing.
3. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 a.m.
•
READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY: � ' 1 �j, 7y 8
COUNCI MEMBER DATE
p� /L' , q/17/01.-- C UNCIL ME E ' DATE
ATTEST:
''Let -,,.- ,,ef
CITY CLERK MARY PLACE, MAYOR
Minutes prepared by Linda Watkins and Karen Roberts. An audio and video tape of this meeting are available in
the City Clerk's Office
•
1
6