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.