They are expected to vote at their weekly meeting on a proposal to have interim county solicitor Howard Kelin seek legal standing for the county on a petition regarding the slots parlor that will be brought before Lancaster City Zoning Hearing Board Monday.

The $150 million parlor, which is being proposed for the Bulova Technologies building, North Queen and East Orange streets, by Manheim Township attorneys Jerome Finefrock and Jim Nettleton Jr., would house up to 5,000 slot machines.

Project leaders are scheduled to go before the city zoners at 8 p.m. at Southern Market Center to seek a special exception needed to operate the slot machines.

At that meeting, anyone who owns or has an interest in property near the proposed slots parlor can seek legal standing in the case, according to city zoning officer Walt Siderio.

Typically, Siderio said, the city requires people seeking standing in zoning cases to own or have an interest in property within 400 feet of the property that’s being brought before the board.

With the slots parlor, Siderio said, the board is considering expanding that distance, although a final decision has not yet been made.

People who are granted standing in zoning cases have the right to ask questions of the applicants during proceedings before the board, Siderio said. They also have the right to appeal in Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas any decision made by the board.

Because the county owns the courthouse on North Duke Street and the former Armstrong building on North Queen Street, Kelin said, the commissioners would qualify for legal standing in the case.

“They’re both close enough to the (Bulova building) that they believe they are entitled to standing in this matter,” he said.

Kelin said he has not yet been given any direction on what the county’s concerns are regarding the proposed slots parlor.

Commissioners Dick Shellenberger and Pete Shaub both said Kelin’s possible appointment and any official position the county might have on the proposed slots parlor would be discussed at today’s meeting.

They declined to discuss it Tuesday night.

But both commissioners have publicly stated they believe the proposed slots parlor is not a good fit in Lancaster County.

“That isn’t Lancaster County,” Shellenberger said Dec. 14. “I would not want to see a casino come to Lancaster.”

Shaub was quoted the same day saying, “I do not think it is a good economic development project and do not think it represents the family values that we all hold dear here in Lancaster County.”

Democratic Commissioner Molly Henderson said, “My initial reaction is that it’s quite a departure from traditional Lancaster County venues.”

On Tuesday night, Henderson said she had not yet formed an opinion on the proposal.

Siderio said he expects “a large contingent to apply” for legal standing on Jan. 9.