AB 2549,
as amended, Ridley-Thomas. begin deleteCity of Milpitas. end deletebegin insertGambling: moratorium: City of Milpitas.end insert
Existing law declares that it is the policy of the state to protect and promote the sound development of economic opportunity in cities and counties, and the general welfare of the inhabitants of those communities through the employment of all appropriate means. Existing law requires each local agency, as defined to include a city, to provide specified information to the public before approving an economic development subsidy, as defined, within its jurisdiction, and to review, hold hearings, and report on those subsidies at specified intervals.
end deleteThis bill would authorize the City of Milpitas, on or before April 1, 2015, to organize an independent local commission, composed of the city manager, as an ex officio member, and 7 specified members appointed by the Milpitas City Council, to investigate and study issues related to employment, revenues, and economic activity in order to identify and recommend ways to raise revenues for specified purposes.
end deleteThis bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2017.
end deleteExisting law, the Gambling Control Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of various legalized gambling activities and establishments by the California Gambling Control Commission and the investigation and enforcement of those activities and establishments by the Department of Justice.
end insertbegin insertUnder the Gambling Control Act, a city, county, or city and county, may authorize controlled gambling consistent with state law, as provided. However, until January 1, 2020, existing law prohibits the governing body and the electors of a city, county, or city and county from authorizing or expanding any legal gaming beyond that permitted on January 1, 1996. Additionally, until January 1, 2020, existing law prohibits the commission from issuing a gambling license for a gambling establishment that was not licensed to operate on December 31, 1999, except as specified.
end insertbegin insertThis bill would, notwithstanding the moratorium described above, authorize the City of Milpitas, upon approval of the electors, to authorize controlled gambling within that city subject to specified conditions, including, among others, that controlled gambling may only be conducted by a gambling establishment licensed by the commission and operating in the County of Santa Clara on or before January 1, 2013, that elects to change its location to the City of Milpitas from another location in the County of Santa Clara.
end insertThis bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City of Milpitas.
Vote: majority.
Appropriation: no.
Fiscal committee: begin deleteno end deletebegin insertyesend insert.
State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
The Legislature finds and declares all of the
2following:
3(a) Recent losses of local funding have degraded public safety
4in the City of Milpitas (city) as the city has cut employment. Since
5the 2011-12 fiscal year, the city has laid off 110 employees,
6including 12 firefighters, and has been unable to fill 147 other
7positions that would otherwisebegin delete hadend deletebegin insert haveend insert been filled, including 13
8police officer positions.
P3 1(b) A lack of economic development tools has stopped
2investment in previously approved critical infrastructure in the
3city. Two hundred twenty million dollarsbegin insert ($220,000,000)end insert worth
4of road, water, and sewer improvements, which had been approved
5in the capital improvement plan of the city, cannot be constructed.
6Other projects, including infrastructurebegin delete projectsend deletebegin insert projects,end insert have
7been delayed due to significant funding shortfalls in the city’s
8general fund to maintain streets. The city’s annual shortfall to
9maintain its Metropolitan Transit Commission-mandated Pavement
10Condition Index goal of 70 isbegin delete $4 millionend deletebegin insert
four million five hundred
11thousand dollars ($4,500,000)end insert per year.
12(c) A lack of economic development tools has stopped
13previously approved development projects in the city, including
14a 120-room hotel and a low- and moderate-income senior housing
15project. With respect to the latter project, the project developer
16had agreed to employ 100 full-time medical and caregiver
17positions. Both projects had completed permits and land use
18reviews, including reviews under the California Environmental
19Quality Act.
20(d) Thebegin delete city desires to ensure the greatest amount of citizen begin insert
Milpitas City Council adopted an
21participation to increase economic activity in the McCarthy Ranch
22area of the city near the Newby Island landfill in order to find new
23revenue sources to replace the funds, restore losses of firefighters
24and police officers, maintain and upgrade critical infrastructure,
25and generate employment and economic activity through previously
26approved private investment.end delete
27entertainment overlay to its zoning ordinance on March 16, 2010,
28that would allow for operation of a licensed gambling
29establishment in specific areas in the City of Milpitas. Although
30the Legislature enacted the moratorium on the expansion of
31gambling in the Gambling Control Act, the Legislature retains the
32power to create exceptions to the moratorium to determine where
33gambling may take place consistent with factual and legal
34circumstances.end insert
35(e) Gambling establishments are significant sources of tax
36revenues within their jurisdictions that can fund staffing, economic
37development, and public infrastructure projects, including those
38that have suffered in the City of Milpitas as a result of cuts in the
39city’s budget.
Section 53083.2 is added to the Government Code, to
2read:
(a) On or before April 1, 2015, the City of Milpitas
4may organize an independent local commission to investigate and
5study issues related to employment, revenues, and economic
6activity in order to identify and recommend ways to raise revenues
7to increase city staff to adequate levels, to invest in infrastructure
8and development projects, and to
increase economic activity in
9the McCarthy Ranch area of the City of Milpitas near the Newby
10Island landfill.
11(b) The commission shall be composed of seven people
12appointed by the Milpitas City Council, as follows:
13(1) One member of the business community who is also a
14member of the Milpitas Chamber of Commerce.
15(2) One employee of the City of Milpitas Fire Department.
16(3) One employee of the City of Milpitas Police Department.
17(4) One member of a local union that is unaffiliated with public
18employee unions representing workers for the City of Milpitas.
19(5) One owner of real property within the McCarthy Ranch area
20of the City of Milpitas near the Newby Island landfill.
21(6) Two residents of the City of Milpitas.
22(c) The city manager of the City of Milpitas shall be an ex
23officio member of the commission and report on the commission’s
24activities to the Milpitas City Council.
25(d) The commission shall elect its own chairperson.
26(e) Within one year of the City of Milpitas forming the
27commission, the commission’s authority shall cease.
28(f) This section shall remain in effect only until
January 1, 2017,
29and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that
30is enacted before January 1, 2017, deletes or extends that date.
begin insertSection 19967 is added to the end insertbegin insertBusiness and Professions
32Codeend insertbegin insert, to read:end insert
(a) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter,
34including, but not limited to, Sections 19961, 19961.06, 19962,
35and 19963, the City of Milpitas may authorize controlled gambling
36within that city pursuant to this section.
37(b) The City of Milpitas may authorize controlled gambling in
38that city if a majority of the electors voting thereon have
39affirmatively approved a measure that complies with subdivision
40(c) of Section 19960.
P5 1(c) (1) Controlled gambling authorized pursuant to this section
2shall be conducted only by a gambling establishment licensed by
3the commission and operating in the County of Santa Clara on or
4before January 1, 2013, that elects to
change its location to the
5City of Milpitas from another location in the County of Santa
6Clara.
7(2) A gambling establishment shall do both of the following
8prior to relocating to the City of Milpitas from another location
9in the County of Santa Clara:
10(A) Apply for, and receive, a license from the City of Milpitas.
11(B) Upon receipt of the license described in subparagraph (A),
12provide notice to the commission and the department of the
13gambling establishment’s intent to relocate to the City of Milpitas
14from another location in the County of Santa Clara. The notice
15required by this paragraph shall be provided at least three months
16before the gambling establishment relocates to, or offers controlled
17gambling in, the City of Milpitas.
18(d) Notwithstanding
any law or regulation, if the conditions of
19subdivision (c) are satisfied, the commission and the department
20shall authorize a gambling establishment’s relocation to the City
21of Milpitas from another location in the County of Santa Clara.
22(e) The Legislature finds and declares that a special law is
23necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable within
24the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California
25Constitution because of the unique circumstances in the City of
26Milpitas, described in Section 1 of this act. There is a rational
27relationship between authorizing controlled gambling within the
28entertainment overlay designated by the city’s zoning ordinance
29and reversing the city’s financial crisis. This act simply allows the
30voters in the City of Milpitas to act effectively on the question of
31whether to authorize controlled gambling in that jurisdiction
32consistent with provisions of the Gambling Control Act and under
33the city’s
financial circumstances. Should the voters in the City of
34Milpitas adopt such an ordinance, the city can then compete to
35attract one of the three licensed gambling establishments operating
36in the County of Santa Clara to move within the county to the City
37of Milpitas. This exception to the moratorium in the Gambling
38Control Act is not arbitrary because it respects the Legislature’s
39policy, adopted in the moratorium, to not authorize new licenses.
40Moreover, the circumstances in the City of Milpitas outweigh any
P6 1consideration of a more general law creating an even greater
2exception to the policy adopted by the Legislature in the
3moratorium.
The Legislature finds and declares that a special law
5is necessary and that a general law cannot be made applicable
6within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California
7Constitution because of the unique circumstances in the City of
8Milpitas, where parcels on the west side of Interstate 880 and to
9the east of Coyote Creek in the McCarthy Ranch area of Milpitas
10near the Newby Island landfill, the San Francisco Bay area, and
11the regional water pollution control plant face particular challenges
12to economic development as a result of their restrictive location.
O
96