Cypress Sees Casino Initiative as a Bad Bet

CYPRESS — Fearing financial harm to the community, city officials have decided to fight a statewide initiative that would make the racetracks in Cypress and four other cities into legal gambling casinos.

Backers of the California Gambling, Regulation and Taxation Amendment are seeking 693,230 signatures of registered voters by May 16, hoping to qualify the measure for the June 2, 1998, statewide ballot.

Passage would amend the state Constitution to enable casino gambling at five horse racetracks--Los Alamitos Race Course in Cypress, Santa Anita Race Course in Arcadia, Hollywood Park in Inglewood, Bay Meadows Race Course in San Mateo and Golden Gate Fields in Albany.

Officials here are worried the initiative would prohibit local governments from taxing the new casinos or charging them any fees, although the city might face the expense of increased police services.

“The proponents of this initiative, whoever they are, have purposely worded this initiative to very specifically ignore the financial impact on the municipalities that would be most affected by its passage,” City Councilman Tim Keenan said.

The council voted unanimously Monday night to oppose the initiative and organize other cities to fight the measure.

“There’s nothing [beneficial] in it for Cypress,” Mayor Tom Carroll said.

The proposed constitutional amendment would legalize all types of casino betting, including slot machines, at the racetracks. It also would authorize them to operate 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, with no restrictions on hours to serve alcoholic beverages.

In a report to the council, city senior management analyst Kevin Justen said, “The only revenue that the city would realize would be from increased economic activity. It cannot be determined at this time if revenue increases would offset the increased cost of service resulting from large numbers of people entering the city to gamble.”

Justen also told the council that city staff has been unable to find the backers of the casino initiative.

“Materials from the California secretary of state’s office show Juanita Long of Fullerton as the proponent of the measure,” Justen said. “Staff has been unsuccessful thus far in attempts to contact Ms. Long to determine if additional individuals or organizations are sponsoring the amendment.”

The Times also was unable to reach Long on Tuesday. The telephone number she gave the secretary of state’s office is disconnected.

Justen said he went to the mailing address she listed in Fullerton and found a mailbox drop.

Shirley Washington, press secretary in the secretary of state’s office in Sacramento, said Long is the only listed proponent of the casino initiative. “That’s all we were provided,” she said.

Washington verified that the initiative qualified for statewide signature-gathering last Dec. 17 and has until May 16 to obtain the 693,230 signatures throughout the state.

The initiative seeks to start casino operations four months upon voter approval. It would require casino owners to pay the state 8% of net revenue, and that money would be earmarked for education.

Casino owners also would pay the county in which they are located a 1% tax, and an additional 1% tax would go to a new state Casino Gambling Commission. The commission’s eight members would be nominated by the governor and approved by a majority of the state Senate.

The proposed constitutional amendment would override all existing state and local laws, including those on alcoholic beverages.

Currently, the California Constitution bans casino gambling, but state law does allow local option--decisions by city voters--for card clubs that offer poker.

An effort was launched in 1993 to legalize card club gambling at Los Alamitos Race Course. That effort, backed by the racecourse owners, failed by an overwhelming margin at the polls.