What are Measures 82 and 83 all about? Measure 82 would overturn a 28-year-old state constitutional ban on non-tribal casinos, which now are allowed only by Oregon’s nine recognized tribes under federal law. Measure 83, a companion, would authorize a private casino on the site of the now defunct Multnomah Greyhound Park in Wood Village east of Portland. Now on to what "The Grange" claims to offer... The developers, backed by a gaming company based in Toronto, are promising us a $300 million “family friendly entertainment and casino destination” that would include up to 3,500 slot machines, a 125-room hotel, restaurants, pubs, an outdoor plaza for festivals and farmers’ markets, a water slide, bowling alley, concert hall and don't forget the cinema. The complex aptly named “The Grange” would generate around $100 million dollars every year for public schools and other public purposes. The Grange would also employ around 3,000 construction workers during the construction and 2,000 full time employees with benefits. This sounds great, but what about other casino's popping up? With the new changes that measure 82 would bring, any new private non-tribal casino that wants to build would need take the following steps. (1) Voters would have to authorize the casino by initiative petition. (2) Once the backers collect enough signatures, voters statewide would get to vote. (3) Then the residents in the city with the potential casino would vote whether to approve the casino. (4) The casino must be owned and operated by a corporation incorporated in Oregon. (5) The casino could not be within a 60-mile radius of a tribal casino operating on reservation land in Oregon. (6) And finally, the casino would have to pay 25% of all adjusted gross revenue to the state for public schools. So, no measure 82 does not allow for just one non-tribal casino. It does allow for more. But, they can't just pop up, you the Oregon voter would have to make it happen. Now onto my opinion... I like the idea of "The Grange" the thought that we could add millions of dollars into our struggling, always-needy, school system. I like the thousands of construction jobs and the two-thousand full time jobs that it would create. I also like the family entertainment part. And, I honestly don't believe that Oregonians would skip going to an Indian casino VS a privately owned casino over games. Maybe concerts, movies, water-slides and family activities, but thats a "maybe."
Wording for Measure 82:
The Oregon Constitution currently prohibits the Legislative Assembly from authorizing a casino to operate in this state. Ballot Measure xx would amend the Constitution and authorize the establishment of privately-owned casinos, subject to certain conditions. Under the Ballot Measure amendment, a privately-owned casino may be allowed to operate in this state, only if, all of the following criteria are satisfied: (i) The privately-owned casino must be approved by a separate statewide initiative; (ii) The privately-owned casino must be located in an incorporated city and the electors of that incorporated city must approve the casino’s development; (iii) The privately-owned casino must be owned and operated by a taxpaying corporation that is incorporated in Oregon; (iv) The privately-owned casino may not be located within 60 miles of a tribal casino that was operating on reservation land on January 1, 2011; and finally, (v) The privately-owned casino must pay twenty-five (25) percent of its adjusted gross revenues to the State of Oregon. Eighty percent of each payment must be deposited into the Oregon State Lottery Fund and 20 percent must be deposited into a fund established by Ballot Measure yy (IRR 38). The privately-owned casino will be regulated by the Oregon State Police and Oregon Lottery. The Oregon Lottery is presently required to be self-supporting and the revenues from the private casino will cover all the administrative and regulatory costs as currently required by the Constitution.
Result of "Yes" Vote: "Yes" vote amends state constitution to authorize privately-owned casinos; requires such casinos to give percentage of monthly revenue to State Lottery for specified purposes.
Result of "No" Vote: "No" vote maintains current state of the law, which does not authorize any privately-owned casino within state; tribal casinos authorized pursuant to gaming compacts.
No comments:
Post a Comment