Ohio OKs Casinos:

Political leaders now must decide whether to challenge the issue in court or try to pass another amendment
Wednesday, November 4, 2009 3:04 AM
By James Nash
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Battered by a grim economy, job-hungry Ohioans approved casinos for Columbus and three other cities yesterday.

Voters broke a streak of four failed gambling measures in Ohio by approving Issue 3 with about 53 percent voting yes. The measure benefited from a strong appeal by unions and urban politicians to get voters in the four casino cities -- Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati and Toledo -- to the polls. The measure carried by large majorities in the Cleveland and Cincinnati areas, won with a smaller majority in Toledo, and lost in Franklin County.

"We're going to deliver something very special, and we're going to work very hard with a lot of people," said Dan Gilbert, owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers and owner-to-be of two of the casinos. "This is not going to be a savior by any means, but it's another brick in the wall."
Gilbert will have the rights to casinos in Cleveland and Cincinnati. His partner on Issue 3, Pennsylvania-based Penn National Gaming Inc., will develop casinos in Toledo and Columbus' Arena District. Construction could begin by late 2010, and the new facilities would open in 2012.
It's now up to Ohio's political leaders to decide whether to mount a legal challenge or launch an effort to pass another constitutional amendment next year to replace parts of the measure approved yesterday.

Gov. Ted Strickland, who opposed Issue 3, was noncommittal on the latter possibility.
"While I am personally disappointed, I understand why Ohioans, who are struggling under the weight of this global recession, were willing to give this proposal a chance," Strickland said in a statement. "The voters have spoken, and state leaders and legislators must now implement the constitutional amendment while making sure it benefits the people of this state and puts more Ohioans to work."

Ohio House Speaker Armond Budish, a Beachwood Democrat who reluctantly supported Issue 3, is committed to passing legislation that ensures the best deal for the state, spokesman Keary McCarthy said last night. But Budish has not broached the possibility of putting another amendment on the ballot to change the casinos' terms. Tenenbaum declined to comment on the possibility of another ballot try that could put the state in charge of bringing casinos to Ohio and generate more revenue for state coffers. "It would depend entirely on what the proposal was," he said.

Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman, who opposed Issue 3, said lawmakers should move quickly to put a new amendment on the ballot to raise the tax rate, put the casino licenses up to bid and let cities regulate their locations and operations. "If this passes, my hope is that the legislature will step in," Coleman said last night. It would take a three-fifths majority of the legislature to place a constitutional amendment on the May ballot. The measure would have to be filed with the secretary of state's office at least 90 days before the election, or Feb. 3.
Rob Walgate, co-chair of Vote No Casinos, conceded shortly after 11 p.m. "They won and we lost," he said. "Thankfully, the commercials are over and they can sit back and deliver on all their promises."

Proponents of the issue mounted a big push to get voters to the polls and to vote by absentee ballot. Indeed, Franklin County voters stomped the measure on Election Day, but heavily favored it in early voting. About half of the total vote cast for the issue in Cuyahoga County, the state's most populous and where the issue had strong political support, came from early ballots.
Sandy Theis, spokeswoman for the opposition group TruthPAC, said the heavy pro-casino turnout in urban counties helped the issue.

Many voters who cast "yes" ballots noted that thousands of Ohioans gamble in other states without benefiting their home state. The casinos would jump-start economic development in the state's largest cities and retain tax money in Ohio, they said. "I don't go to casinos, but lots of people go elsewhere to gamble, so they might as well keep the money here," said Regina Lee, 35, of Westerville. "We need the tax dollars and the jobs."

Some who voted against Issue 3 cited the potential for crime and other social problems as well as exaggerated promises of jobs from casino proponents. John Goettler, 45, an Upper Arlington consultant for nonprofit organizations, said he is opposed to expanded gambling in Ohio. He is worried the casinos could bring more crime and other problems and thinks the pro-casino television ads promising thousands of jobs contained "blatant lies." "As bad as the economy is legalizing casino gambling is not the answer," he said.

Ohio voters had rejected gambling issues four times before, including twice in the past three years. Last year, nearly 63 percent of voters rejected a proposal for a casino in Clinton County.
Dispatch Senior Editor Joe Hallett and reporters Mark Niquette and Jim Siegel contributed to this story.

jnash@dispatch.com