Laserfiche WebLink
City staff and law enforcement have spent <br />much time and resources conducting <br />statewide criminal background checks; <br />investigating massage therapist accreditation <br />programs to determine legitimacy and <br />credibility; and inspecting and monitoring <br />establishments due to citizen complaints and <br />concerns. This has resulted in different <br />procedures, requirements and fee structures <br />across the state. Despite the thorough work <br />of city staff and law enforcement, when an <br />illegitimate business suspects investigation, <br />it will often close down and re -open in a <br />different city. Without any sort of statewide <br />database of these businesses, one city's <br />solution may become another city's <br />problem. <br />Additionally, local law enforcement <br />agencies do not have access to national <br />criminal history data. This has allowed those <br />with criminal convictions in other states <br />related to sex trafficking and prostitution to <br />obtain massage therapy business and/or <br />professional licenses in cities in Minnesota. <br />Allowing access to this information could <br />help cities prevent sex trafficking across <br />state lines. <br />Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities supports the statewide registration <br />or licensure of massage therapists that <br />would not pre-empt the ability of cities to <br />regulate massage therapy establishments. <br />The League also supports legislation <br />pertaining to the practice of massage <br />therapy that accomplishes the following: <br />a) Helps cities establish legitimacy of <br />providers and businesses applying for <br />a local license to practice, including <br />allowing local law enforcement <br />agencies access to national criminal <br />history databases. <br />b) Prevents individuals from conducting <br />criminal activities such as prostitution <br />and sex trafficking out of <br />48 <br />establishments operating as massage <br />therapy facilities. <br />c) Improves provider compliance with <br />Minn. Stat. ch. 146A and requires the <br />state to take action in response to <br />noncompliance. <br />d) Protects the public from injury and <br />from other conditions that may result <br />in harm. <br />SD-53. Lawful Gambling and Local <br />Control <br />Issue: As part of the 2009 reforms to lawful <br />gambling statutes, some local control was <br />removed from the lawful gambling process. <br />Previously, the lawful gambling licensee <br />would have to obtain the city council's <br />approval as part of its application to renew <br />the organization's premises permit (some <br />forms of lawful gambling require obtaining <br />an organizational license and a premises <br />permit(s) from the state). This step was <br />removed when the state established a <br />perpetual organizational license and <br />premises permitting system. Because these <br />licenses and permits are issued by the state, <br />under the current system a city's authority <br />over these licensees is limited to: 1) <br />approval of the initial premises permit; and <br />2) enforcement of the city's lawful gambling <br />ordinance. Some city officials have <br />concerns that gambling organizations will be <br />more apt to ignore local regulations (such as <br />spending the required percentage of lawful <br />gambling expenditures in the city's trade <br />area) if they don't need the city's approval <br />for the renewal of their state -issued premises <br />permits. <br />Response: The licensee should be required <br />to obtain local approval on an annual <br />basis, or at longer intervals as determined <br />by the city, and file the resolution of local <br />approval with the Gambling Control <br />Board. <br />