Question 2 on the November ballot is the Casino question, asking voters, “Do you want to allow a certain Maine company to have the only casino in Maine, to be located in Oxford County, if part of the revenue is used to fund specific state programs?”
A “yes” vote favors the proposal; a “no” vote opposes it.
Opponents and proponents of Question 2, which would make way for a casino resort in the town of Oxford, are using the same data to make opposing cases, but there’s one touchstone of agreement between them: the law that will be decided Nov. 4 is deeply flawed.
The law, developed by Rumford attorney Seth Carey, was sent to the legislature in January after Carey’s group compiled some 59,504 signatures in support of his proposal. The legislature opted to send the proposal to voters to decide.
In September, the initiative was re-energized when Dean Harrold of Olympia Gaming Maine LLC, a former CEO of Caesars Palace, took over and promised to build a more than $100-million resort if the ballot measure passes.
Last week, Harrold and his associates chose the Rt. 26 corridor in Oxford, where several large parcels of land have been for sale for years, as the potential site.
But before any of that happens, even Harrold admits major changes are in order for the law.
Pat LaMarche, a former gubernatorial candidate who serves as spokeswoman for Olympia Gaming, told a newspaper editorial board during a recent campaign stop that she’d like to use “a gallon of whiteout” on the law to rewrite it.
Regardless, she said Maine voters would recognize the revenue that will flow from the casino to local and state governments is too valuable to pass up.
“We feel very good in this environment that voters will look at our financial environment and they’ll see that someone wants to invest $100 million and create 800 jobs,” LaMarche said. “We think this will be beneficial for Maine. Hopefully, (the voters) are not going to keep thumbing their noses at 800 jobs.”
Harrold said he looks forward to rewriting the law with the help of the Maine legislature after the initiative passes on Nov. 4. The provisions of the bill as written include:
– The town of Oxford would have to hold a referendum asking its citizens to approve the concept of a casino in town prior to Dec. 31 for the project to move forward.
– “Oxford Heights,” as the casino resort is already named, would be the only site in the state where gaming devices are allowed, other than the slot machines already in operation at Hollywood Slots in Bangor.
– No other gaming facility would be licensed in Maine for 10 years after the opening of Oxford Heights.
– The bill would remove the current limit on the total number of slot machines allowed in the state while maintaining a 1500-machine limit per facility. It would also prohibit commercial racetracks from expanding their gaming operations beyond slot machines.
– The bill would lower the minimum age for gambling in Maine from 21 to 19 years old.
– The bill would allow operation of the casino 24 hours a day, 365 days per year.
– Oxford Heights would be required to turn over 39 percent of its gross gaming device income – estimated at $69 million – to the Gambling Control Board.
The state treasurer would distribute those proceeds to 22 specific programs and agencies ranging from Land for Maine’s Future to the development of an east-west highway in Maine. The bill stipulates that the president of the casino organization would sit on the governing board, if one exists, of each entity or program that receives funding from the casino.
Asked which provisions he does not support, Harrold said he opposes reducing the gambling age and having an Oxford Heights executive sit on every governing board that benefits from the casino’s revenue. Other than that, he said he’d work with lawmakers toward a mutually agreeable bill.
To Dennis Bailey, who spearheads the CasinosNo! coalition and who opposed previous attempts to build casinos in Maine, approving a bill that hasn’t been finalized would be “idiotic and unfair.”
“That’s asking people to vote with blinders on,” he said. “It’s the most amazing thing I’ve ever seen for the proponents to call their own legislation a mess.”
But in Oxford, a town that has been hit hard by a shriveling economy, including the loss of hundreds of jobs in recent years from multiple home manufacturing plants and a textile factory, support for the proposal is widespread, Oxford Town Manager Michael Chammings said.
“We need the jobs desperately,” he said. “We’ve lost 300 jobs in the past year and hundreds more before that. We have quite a workforce without a lot of work.”
Both of Oxford County’s senators – Republican David R. Hastings III and Democrat Bruce S. Bryant – said they support the casino.
“I’m no huge fan of casinos, but to me it comes down to jobs,” said Hastings, whose district includes the Rt. 26 corridor in Oxford.
Rep. James M. Hamper (R-Oxford) offers an opposing view. He said he opposes both the legislation that’s up for a vote as well as the concept of building a casino. Despite those objections, he said he’s pleased the public will make the decision.
“I hope on this one, they will decide against it,” he said. “Casinos do not produce anything. The money is going to be leaving. It’ll create jobs, along with all the social ills that gaming produces.”
Hamper said he’s heard from many constituents both for and against the measure.
According to a study commissioned by Olympia Gaming, the casino would create 907 jobs – more than proponents initially estimated – and a $32.5 million annual payroll.
Out of revenues of $164.1 million, about $69 million would be dumped into state coffers every year. Construction of the facility, which would include a 300-room hotel, a large conference center, a casino with up to 1500 slot machines, table games, a range of dining options, a spa, indoor and outdoor swimming pools, parking for guests and accommodations for snowmobiles, cross country skiing and numerous other amenities – would employ 1277 people.
Bailey said those rosy numbers are inflated and don’t take into account what such a development would take away. But he admits the prospect is tempting given the country’s economic woes.
“People are ready to sign a deal with the devil if it will bring them jobs,” he said. “This is not going to help them. Nobody is saying where that money is coming from. It’s money not spent in downtowns or in local bars or restaurants. That’s not economic development. It will not help your town.”
(Statehouse News Service)
