Spokane Valley council advances ban on freestanding virtual‑currency kiosks after police warn of scams

The Spokane Valley City Council on April 7 voted unanimously to advance Ordinance 26‑005, which would add a new chapter to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code to prohibit freestanding virtual‑currency kiosks within city limits.

Assistant Chief Jared Keane introduced Sergeant Patrick Bloomer of the Spokane Valley investigative unit and Deputy City Attorney Caitlin Prunty, who presented the draft ordinance and law‑enforcement findings. Sergeant Bloomer told the council his unit has investigated local cases and is “investigating a $1,800,000 cryptocurrency investment scam right now,” and described national trends showing older adults losing the largest amounts. “As you get older, they’re just willing to follow the instructions and go to a machine,” Bloomer said, describing the kiosks that take cash and transfer value to crypto wallets.

The draft ordinance (packet title: draft ordinance 26‑005) would create a new chapter prohibiting placement and operation of freestanding virtual‑currency kiosks, require removal of any kiosk within 30 days of the ordinance’s effective date, and authorize a Class 1 civil infraction with a $250 penalty and potential business‑license revocation for violations. Deputy City Attorney Caitlin Prunty said staff modeled the measure on an earlier kratom ordinance and can further clarify definitions and exceptions before a second reading.

Councilmembers asked staff to ensure the ordinance would not unintentionally cover legitimate business transactions, such as in‑person purchases processed through a vendor’s Point‑of‑Sale system or smartphone‑based transfers. Sergeant Bloomer and Ms. Prunty said the intent is to target stand‑alone kiosks and that standard merchant payment flows or phone‑based services would not be affected; Prunty said staff could tighten the “stand‑alone” language before the second reading.

Councilmember Kelly, who said she had received out‑of‑state feedback questioning a ban, acknowledged the FBI statistics included in the presentation and the disproportionate impact on older residents. Several councilmembers expressed support for the ordinance as a consumer‑protection measure. The motion to advance the ordinance to a second reading passed unanimously by voice vote.

Next steps: staff will draft language refinements requested by council and bring the ordinance back for a second reading, at which point the council may vote on adoption.