COMMUNITY NEWS : 4 Cities, Residents Sue to Block Casino : Gaming: Officials and a citizens group say Pomona must conduct an environmental study and put the matter before voters.

Citing fears that two proposed card clubs in Pomona could increase noise, crime and traffic in the surrounding areas, four neighboring cities and a local citizens group have filed a lawsuit to force Pomona to conduct a full environmental impact report and allow residents to vote on the proposal.

The cities of La Verne, Claremont, Chino and Chino Hills joined the Committee Against Card Club Casinos in Pomona in filing the suit in Superior Court last Friday.

The suit alleges that Pomona violated the Gaming Registration Act and the California Environmental Quality Act by approving a business license ordinance and zoning ordinance for the casinos without conducting an environmental impact report and a public vote.

Martin Lomeli, city manager of La Verne, said the group was driven to file the lawsuit after Pomona ignored at least a dozen letters the cities sent regarding the issues. And members of the citizens group said they protested the casino proposal in writing and at City Council meetings.

“In essence, Pomona has dared the other cities and the citizens to sue them,” Lomeli said.

Preliminary plans for a card club named Champs proposed 100 gaming tables in a 68,000-square-foot facility along the Pomona (60) Freeway, Pomona City Atty. Arnold Alvarez-Glasman said. Tradewinds, the other proposed casino, would feature 50 tables, plus live music, food, video games and pool, in a 60,000-square-foot complex on the southwest corner of the Los Angeles County Fairgrounds.

In May, the city approved a business license ordinance that Alvarez-Glasman said updated a 1964 gaming law, and a zoning ordinance that allows card clubs in areas zoned for light industry and at the fairgrounds. The council took no action on the specific card club proposals, however.

For now, Alvarez-Glasman said, the approval process is on hold while the city considers various reports on the proposals. Opponents of the card clubs say Pomona was out of line in approving the new ordinances.

The Gaming Registration Act requires cities seeking casinos that did not have ordinances before 1984 allowing gaming clubs to put the issue on the ballot. And there lies the bone of contention. Pomona says it has laws dating to 1964 that allow casino gambling. Card club opponents, however, say it does not, and that it in fact passed an ordinance that year banning all card games.

The Superior Court’s interpretation of that law will decide whether Pomona must put the issue before the public. Last month the city considered putting card clubs on the ballot, but on June 29, the council voted not to.

The suit also says the California Environmental Quality Act requires Pomona to conduct an environmental impact report. Pomona did issue a “negative declaration”--a shorter, less comprehensive investigation of the casinos’ possible effects on surrounding areas. And Alvarez-Glasman said the city has not ruled out the possibility of conducting a full environmental impact report, which would involve extensive study and public comment. Although the suit contends that Pomona has overlooked some legal obligations in approving the card club proposal, some neighboring officials say they don’t want card clubs with or without an environmental report and an election.

“I think card clubs do bring in organized crime,” Councilman Ed Graham of Chino Hills said. “Nothing positive can come out of card clubs besides cash flowing into a city, but at what cost?”