Lansing, Michigan Is Tackling Illegal Gambling Thanks To A New Ordinance

Could you please rewrite your original statement so that I can assist you?

In its independent effort, a city in Michigan is addressing the issue of illegal gambling. The Lansing City Council took action in August by enacting a municipal law that explicitly prohibits any form of illegal gambling within its jurisdiction.

Engaging in unsanctioned gaming activities is deemed a misdemeanor under the ordinance, carrying the potential consequences of imprisonment and monetary penalties.

Gambling is the act of participating in games involving money and utilizing various tools such as dice, cards, computers, or slot machines. However, the regulation grants exemptions for fundraising and charity events, as well as officially registered non-profit organizations affiliated with the city.

Lansing City Council responds to recent gambling arrest

Five Lansing women pleaded guilty to charges related to the operation of an illegal gambling ring, which served as the initial indication of a potential city gambling ordinance.

In June, the women made an appearance in court, after which Richard Kalm, the executive director of the Michigan Gaming Control Board, indicated in a statement that legislation was imminent.

The Lansing City Council acknowledges the gravity of this offense and intends to hold a vote next week regarding a regional ordinance against illegal gambling.

Passing legislation

Up until this point, the responsibility of handling illegal gambling cases in the city was entrusted to the Michigan Attorney General’s office. However, due to the limited number of just two investigators assigned to assess potential unlawful gambling activities throughout the entire state, delays in enforcement were frequently experienced.

The first try to pass the legislation did not succeed, resulting in a 4-1 failure. Due to the absence of Council Members Patricia Spitzley, Jeremy Garza, and Peter Spadafore, who were unable to cast their votes, the necessary five votes were not obtained. However, after addressing certain concerns, a revised ordinance was eventually approved with a vote of 7-1.

Opposition to Lansing’s new illegal gambling ordinance

Fourth Ward Council Member Brian Jackson was the sole member who opposed the new gambling ordinance. Jackson, who represents northwest Lansing, voiced his apprehension regarding the extensive wording of the ordinance.

During the first try to approve the regulation, worries arose regarding the inclusion of popular prize vending machines. One such game that caused concern was the crane game, where players strive to manipulate a mechanical crane in order to capture a prize.

Adam Hussain, Council Member for southwest Lansing’s Third Ward, expressed apprehension that the previous version of the regulation might restrict crane games at popular establishments like Denny’s or Chuck E. Cheese’s. However, the updated version of the regulation now includes additional information to allow for the operation of crane and arcade games.

According to Hussein, the main focus of the ordinance is on organizations involved in illegal gambling rather than popular arcade games. He believes that these specific businesses are at the core of the issue.

Regrettably, our impoverished neighborhoods bear a disproportionate burden of these gambling operations. The individuals who have the least to sacrifice are the ones suffering the greatest losses, and I find it deeply troubling that any business would exploit people in such a manner.

Jackson is worried that the ordinance lacks sufficient specificity.

Jackson said that even though the intent may be different, a future police chief could still interpret the plain language and believe that having a card game at grandma’s house is against the law.

Civil forfeiture a sticking point

In addition to specificity, Jackson has other concerns as well. One of them pertains to the clause which grants the city the authority to confiscate property, including funds associated with an alleged gambling enterprise.

The crucial term here is “alleged.” The city is empowered to confiscate assets prior to a verdict being reached in a legal proceeding.

Jackson stated, “Based on my extensive background as both a prosecutor and a defense attorney, I am convinced that civil forfeiture suffers from inherent flaws. It is evident that public opinion has been increasingly unfavorable towards civil forfeiture. Instead of expanding it, we should be focusing on implementing measures to regulate and limit forfeiture.”

Despite Jackson’s opposition, the ordinance has now become a law, taking effect as of the time of publication.

Please rewrite the following sentence: “I cannot attend the meeting due to personal reasons.”