Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 03 18 Letter Re: Request for Assistance to Oppose or Radically Revise HB1453 Video Gambling CITY OF CASSELBERRY MAYOR fiLE COpy 95 TRIPLET LA.KE DRIVE. CASSC:LBERRY. FLORIDA 32707 . TELEPHONE (407) 262-7700. ExT. 1 133 SUNCOM: 346-7700 FAX (407) 262-7745 March 18, 1999 The Honorable Rob Wallace, Chairman House Rules & Regulations Committee Florida House of Representatives 218 House Office Building 402 South Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32399 Re: Request for Assistance to Oppose or Radically Revise HB 1453 Video Gambling Dear Representative Wallace: I write as a Mayor of a small city (25,000) in Central Florida urging you to take a leadership position as stated above. In Casselberry, we have one paramutuel in the City and two additional within 500 feet of corporate limits. Ostensibly, if this bill were to become law, we would have 10% of the video gambling in the state right here in Casselberry. The City Commission, in the past, has opposed this for obvious reasons and because, the way it is written, the City will get no benefit and, worse, it will suffer from the negative costs and impacts of not one but three such facilities_ This is too much for a small city. I urge you to defeat this or amend it so that it could address the monstrous negative impact it would have on our fair city. We will be sending ideas for specific amendments under separate cover. Respectfully submitted, () ,"/ Sf 1;.Ll{~ {(, V~~ Bruce A. Pronovost Mayor-Cornrnissioner BAP:jr cc: Representative Bob Starks Members of the City Commission City Manager C1TY OF CASSELBERRY MA YOR FILE COpy 95 TRIPLET LA.KE DRIVE. CASSELBERRY. FLORIDA 32707 . TELEPHONE (407) 262-7700. EXT 1 133 SUNCOM: 346-7700 FAX (407) 262-7745 March 18, 1999 The Honorable Tom Lee, Chairman The Senate Regulated Industries Committee The Florida Senate 311 Senate Office Building 404 South Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32399 Re: Request for Assistance to Oppose or Radically Revise HB 1453 Video Gambling Dear Senator Lee: I write as a Mayor of a small city (25,000) in Central Florida urging you to take a leadership position as stated above_ In Casselberry, we have one paramutuel in the City and two additional within 500 feet of corporate limits. Ostensibly, if this bill were to become law, we would have 10% 0 f the video gambling in the state right here in Casselberry. The City Commission, in the past, has opposed this for obvious reasons and because, the way it is written, the City will get no benefit and, worse, it will suffer from the negative costs and impacts of not one but three such facilities. This is too much for a small city. I urge you to defeat this or amend it so that it could address the monstrous negative impact it would have on our fair city. We will be sending ideas for specitic amendments under separate cover. Respectfully submitted, /} J /)A~ {(., I ~'c:r,,/7d Bruce A. Pronovost Mayor-Commissioner BAP:jr cc: Representative Bob Starks Members of the City Commission City Manager CITY OF CASSELBERRY CITY MANAGER 95 TRIPLET LAKE DRIVE. CASSELBERRY, FLORIDA 32707 · TELEPHONE (407) 262-7700, EXT. 1 131 SUNCOM: 346-7700 FAX (407) 262-7745 TO: See Distribution List FROM: Jack M. Schluckebie City Manager ~. ,Sc-~ DATE: March 26, 1999 SUBJECT: Concern About Impact of Video Gambling on Cities in Florida Anyone reviewing Florida State House of Representatives proposed legislation HB1453 who has responsibility within a municipality or unincorporated area anywhere adjacent to any of the state's existing pari-mutuel facilities should take heed regarding this legislation and its potential negative impacts. Currently, as part of our response to the proposed legislation, elected officials have made contact with our state legislative delegation and are focusing on attempting to abate negative impacts and consequences of the current video gambling attempts. Specifically, ideas that are being advanced would include any or all of the following: 1. Amend the bill to include an amendment provision to Florida statute 205.043 regarding the city's and county's ability to specifically provide a unique license and added license fees for the electronic amusement machines involving gambling. A range which other states may use would be in the vicinity of $30+/month per machine, minimum, although no set amount is recommended at this point. 2. Amend the bill to include an amendment to Florida statute 550.105 (8), such that any other city or county may levy an added license tax specifically referencing pari-mutuel daily licensed operations and not exceeding $500 per day to the extent there is video gambling in operation, for each day of operation. (Currently, although outdated, this paragraph provides for $50 per day for dogs and Jai-Alai and $150 per day for horses). 3. Make a provision of at least a set percentage of revenue to be returned to each and all affected local government with some ratio of sharing, specifically to counties where the facility is unincorporated compared to cities if the facility is in an incorporated area. This would modify the current effect ofF.S. 550.135 whereby all counties (but no cities) currently receive an equal amount, regardless of location or impact. 4. Specifically, double the amount of revenue currently shared equally from pari-mutuel (550.135) to all 67 counties with new incremental amount and making a specified (similar proportional) impact fund to those cities which would be subject to the additional gambling being authorized. TO: Distribution List FROM: Jack M. Schluckebier, City Manager, City of Casselberry DATE: March 26, 1999 SUBJECT: Concern About Impact of Video Gambling on Cities in Florida PAGE 2 5. Amend the bill to provide that any city or county may, by home rule charter provision, establish voter prerequisite approval pursuant to its home rule provisions prior to beginning of video gambling and notwithstanding state licensing and/or legislative authority. This provision would honor the existing charter requirement enacted by voters in Seminole County. As indicated in the House staff analysis, few states have experience merely with video gambling. However, many states have experience with both lottery and other types of rapid, intensive and interactive gambling techniques. Currently, the staff analysis provided as part of House Bill 1453 is woefully inadequate in that it virtually does not acknowledge that there will undoubtedly be significant need for higher level local response than currently exists as billions of gambling revenue are now attracted to a very few locations across the state. Additionally, the analysis is inadequate in that it fails to accurately portray many of the spin-off effects, and the decrease in sales tax which will occur as money previously attributed to identified goods and services will now be used to buy a "state gambling product" and thereby lost to beneficial use by the private sector. While there are a host of reasons people may be morally or otherwise opposed to gambling, our concern at the moment is specifically focused on avoiding and/or abating what we see as a significant negative impact of this legislation, particularly on Casselberry. This is because we have one pari-mutuel in the City and two additional within 500 ft. adjacent. This results in increasing our intensity of inpact to 3 of the 30 pari-mutuels in the state and, accordingly, likely near lO% of the anticipated gambling will occur through this mechanism. If anyone else sees the need to be concerned and follow up, let us please coordinate our efforts and focus on getting as much relief as possible as quickly as possible, directly in the legislation.