Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union City holds public hearing on proposed zoning changes to regulate redemption games and accessory structures
Summary
Union City Borough held a public hearing Sept. 16, 2024, on proposed changes to Zoning Ordinance No. 1118 to define and regulate redemption games ("games of skill") and add Section 701.04 on accessory structures for adjoining lots; no members of the public spoke.
Union City Borough held a public hearing on Sept. 16, 2024, to present a proposed amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 1118 that would define and regulate redemption games (commonly called "games of skill") and add Section 701.04 addressing the use of accessory structures on adjoining lots. Councilor Cross called the hearing to order at 6:05 p.m. at First Global Methodist Church, 42 East High Street.
The amendment as described in the hearing notice would add definitions and permitted-use regulations for redemption games, include a new Section 701.04 to provide for accessory structures on adjoining lots, and add repealer, severability and effective-date provisions. The minutes do not record further detail about the proposed language or any fiscal analysis. The transcript of the minutes records the hearing's purpose as: "to provide information and receive public comment on the proposed amendment to Zoning Ordinance #1118, to provide for definitions and regulation of permitted use zones for redemption games, otherwise known as games of skill; adding section 701.04 to provide for use of accessory structures on adjoining lots; and provide a repealer, severability and effective date." (Minutes text.)
The hearing opened with the borough's stated vision: "The Union City area is a thriving rural community of families, businesses and organizations dedicated to encouraging growth while maintaining small town values." No visitors were present to offer comment during the public-comment portion of the hearing, and the minutes record no oral testimony for or against the proposal. The transcript does not record any vote on Ordinance No. 1118 or a date for further council consideration; those details were not specified in the minutes.
The public record for this hearing includes the ordinance number (No. 1118) and the proposed new section (701.04). The minutes do not provide text of the proposed ordinance, an implementation timetable, or any staff analysis; those items would need to be provided by borough staff or at a subsequent council meeting for members of the public to review.
