Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council January 26, 2009 <br />Regular Meeting Page 7 <br /> <br />Council Member Gunn stated she was surprised that a Blaine organization, not a local group, was 1 <br />coming into Mounds View to run charitable gambling. 2 <br /> 3 <br />Council Member Stigney asked what level of contribution is required by surrounding 4 <br />communities for their charitable gambling permits. Clerk-Administrator Ericson stated it varies 5 <br />from city to city. Council Member Stigney suggested Mounds View review the charitable 6 <br />gambling ordinance and whether it should require that Mounds View, not the trade area, receive 7 <br />a percentage. 8 <br /> 9 <br />Council Member Gunn suggested the Council discuss this ordinance at a Work Session and 10 <br />consider requiring a percentage donation to the City. 11 <br /> 12 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Stigney. To Postpone Consideration of Resolution 7405 to the 13 <br />next Council meeting to allow staff to obtain answers to the Council’s questions. 14 <br /> 15 <br />Mayor Flaherty stated the Blaine Jaycees is a reputable organization, complies with City Code, 16 <br />paid the licensing fee, and has an agreement with Robert’s so he sees no reason to postpone 17 <br />consideration. He suggested the Council discuss the issue of donations at a Work Session. 18 <br /> 19 <br />Council Member Stigney stated the postponement is not to stop other entities but he believed the 20 <br />Code should be clarified prior to this approval, which would be tied up for one year. 21 <br /> 22 <br />Mayor Flaherty felt the Council could move forward with this request and address it further at a 23 <br />Work Session. He stated he is not against looking at what surrounding communities require but 24 <br />does not think it is fair to the Blaine Jaycees or Robert’s to postpone consideration. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Council Member Mueller stated she was not sure a two-week postponement would be an issue 27 <br />for Robert’s, noting they have no charitable gambling until a license is approved and she does not 28 <br />want to do harm to this business if it is a draw for their customers. However, she believed that 29 <br />some valid questions were raised tonight. 30 <br /> 31 <br />Council Member Gunn agreed that valid questions were raised but she did not support 32 <br />postponement or a moratorium consideration. Instead, these issues could be considered at the 33 <br />next Work Session. 34 <br /> 35 <br />Council Member Mueller called the question. 36 <br /> 37 <br />Attorney Riggs advised that the Code was changed two years ago to allow for a trade area and 38 <br />that can be revisited. Since the Code does not clearly state that there is a one year limit, he 39 <br />recommended setting a date certain for the term of this charitable gambling license. 40 <br /> 41 <br />Council Member Stigney withdrew his second to the postponement motion. Council Member 42 <br />Mueller withdrew the motion to postpone. 43 <br /> 44 <br /> 45