3 PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW FOR ONE CASINO EACH IN
CINCINNATI, CLEVELAND, COLUMBUS, AND TOLEDO AND DISTRIBUTE
TO ALL OHIO COUNTIES A TAX ON THE CASINOS
Proposed by Initiative Petition
To adopt Section 6 to Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Ohio
This proposed amendment would:
1. Authorize only one casino facility at a specifically designated location within each
of the cities of Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Toledo.
2. Levy a fixed tax of 33% of gross casino revenue received by each casino operator
of the four casino facilities.
3. Distribute the casino tax as follows:
• 51% among all 88 counties in proportion to such counties’
respective populations. Half of each county’s distribution will go to
its largest city if that city’s population is above 80,000.
• 34% among all public school districts
• 5% among all host cities
• 3% to the Ohio casino control commission
• 3% to the Ohio state racing commission fund
• 2% to a state law enforcement training fund
• 2% to a state problem gambling and addictions fund
4. Require each initial licensed casino operator to pay a single $50,000,000 fee to be
used for state job training purposes and make a minimum initial investment of
$250,000,000 in its facility.
5. Permit approved types of casino gaming authorized by Michigan, West Virginia,
Indiana, and Pennsylvania as of January 1, 2009 or games subsequently authorized
by those states.
6. Authorize the casinos to operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, at the
discretion of the casino operator and require that the casino facilities shall be
subject to all state and local laws and provisions related to health and building
codes, but that no local zoning, land use laws, subdivision regulations or similar
provisions shall prohibit the development or operation of the casinos at the
designated sites.
7. Create the Ohio casino control commission which will license and regulate casino
operators, management companies retained by such casino operators, key
employees, gaming-related vendors, and all gaming authorized by this
constitutional provision.
Check out the tax rate.
Yeah, casino's will be tripping over themselves to come dump 250 million into Ohio under that plan. You'd have a better shot at winning the powerball.
Yeah, casino's will be tripping over themselves to come dump 250 million into Ohio under that plan. You'd have a better shot at winning the powerball.
I will be voting yes, despite my issues with the fact that this is being made a constitutional amendment. Why are you seemingly against it?
As for attracting the actual casinos, I'm not it will be as much of a challenge as you imply. The language in the bill is being crafted by businessman Dan Gilbert (Quicken Loans, Cleveland Cavaliers) and casinos from neighboring states.
It's time for Ohio to jump on the casino bandwagon. It won't save the economy, but it can certainly help. Anything that potentially keeps money in Ohio is fine by me.
I will be voting yes, despite my issues with the fact that this is being made a constitutional amendment. Why are you seemingly against it?
As for attracting the actual casinos, I'm not it will be as much of a challenge as you imply. The language in the bill is being crafted by businessman Dan Gilbert (Quicken Loans, Cleveland Cavaliers) and casinos from neighboring states.
It's time for Ohio to jump on the casino bandwagon. It won't save the economy, but it can certainly help. Anything that potentially keeps money in Ohio is fine by me.
First, it's destined to fail. Not the amendment, but any Casino that would operate under those terms. Regular gamblers won't take any Ohio casino seriously and those are the people you need, or else you become little more than a scratch and win hangout for losers and hillbilly's. Plenty of those casino's already, and they're nothing but trouble. Second, I oppose it because Ohio doesn't deserve the cash. They haven't fully paid the price for their ignorant minimum wage law, high taxes and smoking bans. More suffering is needed to fully educate the average Ohio voter on the consequences of their foolish actions. Any band-aid prevents Ohio from making the real changes that need to be made. Lastly, 250 million is a pittance compared to The Hollywood who will always be able to payout at much higher rates. Any casino in Cincinnati operating under this amendment will get eaten alive and instead of the voters blaming themselves, it will be casino's in general they blame. Let them remain stupid and suffer.
First, it's destined to fail. Not the amendment, but any Casino that would operate under those terms. Regular gamblers won't take any Ohio casino seriously and those are the people you need, or else you become little more than a scratch and win hangout for losers and hillbilly's. Plenty of those casino's already, and they're nothing but trouble.
I don't know enough about how casinos work to know how these casinos are going to be more restrictive than casinos in neighboring states. Care to elaborate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleCardsDad
Second, I oppose it because Ohio doesn't deserve the cash. They haven't fully paid the price for their ignorant minimum wage law, high taxes and smoking bans. More suffering is needed to fully educate the average Ohio voter on the consequences of their foolish actions. Any band-aid prevents Ohio from making the real changes that need to be made.
Michigan and Pennsylvania "don't deserve the cash," either. But they're taking it and not apologizing. No reason why Ohio shouldn't get in on the fun, either. Ohio voters have consistently voted Republican on a wide scale for most of the last few decades. No need to punish anyone. Besides, when Kasich becomes governor, he will make the requisite changes to fix many of the problems you've listed. Casinos, no matter how imperfect, will help make his job easier.
I don't know enough about how casinos work to know how these casinos are going to be more restrictive than casinos in neighboring states. Care to elaborate?
A gross receipts tax that only Casino's have to pay on top of all the other taxation Businesses in Ohio face should speak for itself. Not to mention that the language of the amendment specifies these casino's be opened within these specific cities. That means they're going to be subject to local ordinances and tax codes. Who here thinks the numbskulls that ruined Cleveland and Cincinnati are going to act responsible when they have a perceived cash cow in their sights?
Quote:
Michigan and Pennsylvania "don't deserve the cash," either. But they're taking it and not apologizing. No reason why Ohio shouldn't get in on the fun, either. Ohio voters have consistently voted Republican on a wide scale for most of the last few decades. No need to punish anyone. Besides, when Kasich becomes governor, he will make the requisite changes to fix many of the problems you've listed. Casinos, no matter how imperfect, will help make his job easier.
Michigan has 22 casinos and is ready to open their 23rd. Ohio is proposing four. This is no longer an expanding market and at this point you're simply slicing the pie into smaller pieces. The only place on the map I can see a casino thriving under this plan is Columbus, simply because of it's central location from border competition. Casino gaming is probably the most competitive industry in the United States. If, and it's a big if, you can find an operator willing to risk 300 million dollars under these conditions, the competition will eat them alive. What the competition doesn't do, local Government will.
So the casino must spend a quarter of a billion on their facilities...... not a bad number - casinos in Las Vegas were costing upwards of $3B or so each the last time I checked. Not a paltry sum so only the biggest corporations would go for it.
33% of gross casino revenues? That's the tripper - So out of 100% of gross receipts the casino operator will have to pay off the mortgage ($250MM+), salaries, regular taxes, supplies, utilities, etc. a 33% recieipts tax...... what's left for the poor schmuck that gambles? Most of those costs are fixed and the state wants a ridiculous share, so who will end up with less than they should get? The winner.
This is ANOTHER wealth transfer scheme where the state wants to give something to the people that risked NOTHING in the transaction....... Wow!
They aren't even disguising the attempt to buy votes.
Yeah, casino's will be tripping over themselves to come dump 250 million into Ohio under that plan. You'd have a better shot at winning the powerball.
Could you explain why the casino backers of this amendment would use this language if they were not going to build? At first glance, why would Penn National Gaming support this if it was such a bad deal for them?
A gross receipts tax that only Casino's have to pay on top of all the other taxation Businesses in Ohio face should speak for itself. Not to mention that the language of the amendment specifies these casino's be opened within these specific cities. That means they're going to be subject to local ordinances and tax codes. Who here thinks the numbskulls that ruined Cleveland and Cincinnati are going to act responsible when they have a perceived cash cow in their sights?
Michigan has 22 casinos and is ready to open their 23rd. Ohio is proposing four. This is no longer an expanding market and at this point you're simply slicing the pie into smaller pieces. The only place on the map I can see a casino thriving under this plan is Columbus, simply because of it's central location from border competition. Casino gaming is probably the most competitive industry in the United States. If, and it's a big if, you can find an operator willing to risk 300 million dollars under these conditions, the competition will eat them alive. What the competition doesn't do, local Government will.
Competition and expanding markets, none of that matters to me. Slice the pie up even more, because the slice we'd be taking from is a slice from outside of Ohio. States are competing with each other. I don't feel bad about the fact that Ohio could potentially keep more money in state. I think the bill could have better language, but I'm still in support of it, because I don't think we'll ever get anything better. And we're running out of time, I believe. Your concerns are legit, but everyone has had concerns about every one of the last few bills. It's time to get over it, because it's never going to be perfect.
By the way, the Cleveland and Columbus locations will be fine. The Toledo and Cincinnati locations could struggle, but only from business from the serious gambler.
Could you explain why the casino backers of this amendment would use this language if they were not going to build? At first glance, why would Penn National Gaming support this if it was such a bad deal for them?
Because this guarantees Ohio won't be able to compete with them. Penn isn't going to build anything here.
Because this guarantees Ohio won't be able to compete with them. Penn isn't going to build anything here.
I thought that might be a possibility, which is a shame that because Ohio is last on the casino bandwagon it has to put up with tampering from casinos from neighboring states. Like during the previous election outside casinos spent a ton of money on advertising to get people to vote "no."
Though I think Gilbert is very interested in putting together capital to build at least one (probably in Cleveland).
I thought that might be a possibility, which is a shame that because Ohio is last on the casino bandwagon it has to put up with tampering from casinos from neighboring states. Like during the previous election outside casinos spent a ton of money on advertising to get people to vote "no."
Though I think Gilbert is very interested in putting together capital to build at least one (probably in Cleveland).
I think the out of State interests have figured out they're not going to be able to stop casino gaming forever here. So they're going to try to make it the best it can possibly be, for them. By passing casino gambling by Constiutional amendment they keep the legislature from being able to meddle with it. By setting a 300 million dollar floor to enter the market, they know it will be sometime, if ever, that anyone will build under that tax structure. Not including any language to address the smoking ban was clever, too. Do you know what non-smoking casinos all have in common? Lastly, the kicker is requiring all 4 casinos to be built within incorporated municipalities. I'm sure they'll all have the best interest of the business in mind, and not the cash.
Just like last time I will vote no simply because I don't think that there should be anything in the constitution guaranteeing a right for casinos. If they can't get casinos to pass through the Ohio legislature, the issue should just go away.
C'mon now. You wouldn't know what to do with yourself on Memorial Day weekend if St. Anns festival didn't exist.
Seriously, outdoor church festivals are one of the best parts of the summer.
Have not attended a church festival in over 20 years, and have no plans of doing so anytime soon. I will never again support anything that benefits the church.
I actually live very close to St. Anns and I HATE festival weekend, end up with nothing but a lot of white trash drunks wandering the neighborhood after it shuts down causing trouble.
Have not attended a church festival in over 20 years, and have no plans of doing so anytime soon. I will never again support anything that benefits the church.
I actually live very close to St. Anns and I HATE festival weekend, end up with nothing but a lot of white trash drunks wandering the neighborhood after it shuts down causing trouble.
But just think, what if you hit it big at church black jack? You could bankrupt them!
Just what we need. A casino that people will go and dump tons of money they don't have right down the drain and the broke state will get broker. Im voting no on all this issue 3 magilla.
But just think, what if you hit it big at church black jack? You could bankrupt them!
Nobody ever wins at Church festivals.
They change the rules of games around so you can't win in the long-run.
And church festivals will still exist. Most of that 12 million they generate comes from the hands of kids, yes children. That, my friends is sickening.
Every year I run a beat-the-dealer at a local festival, all I see every year are kids from the hood thinking they are going to become rich in minutes. Next thing you know, they just dropped $50 (from god knows where) and are broke. Just go to a festival, check the big-6, beat-the-dealer and chuck-a-luck booths, all kids. Now go look under the tent at the cash-game poker and blackjack games, everyone fits the mold of:
a. a senior citizen (there are a group of about 30 who travel from festival to festival and work together to squeeze out money in 3-3-5 poker games)
b. a degenerate gambler who does not have enough money to go to a regular casino.
c. someone who has banned themselves from every casino
I'm all for issue simply because I think it would bring Cincinnati back to life. Look what casinos did to their neighboring cities in Indiana. Nice roads, sidewalks, shops, restaurants. Those weren't built out of love.
I don't think the whole casino thing is this great panacea to economic growth that a lot of folks seem to think it is. There are a lot of states that have approved casinos now, and many casinos aren't doing so hot these days.
So, it might have been a real money maker when few states had them, but now that many have approved them, there are more & more casinos competing for basically the same set of finite customers. People with visions of Las Vegas dancing in their heads are mistaken; it will be more like Atlantic City in the end.
What Ohioans ought to be a lot more worried about is doing something about this picture.
Notice there isn't a single Ohio city on the list of 50 best cities to launch a new small business. Now, that's something worth all of the hot air dedicated to casinos right now.
For all you Church Festival fans, a minor detail in Issue 3 that is not being given a lot of news coverage is the fact that this issue:
Quote:
(It) bans all other casino gaming, including "casino nights" offered by churches, fraternal organizations or other charities.
Another interesting piece to this issue:
Quote:
It pre-empts local and state laws, including zoning laws.
So if your local community wants to establish some special zoning laws near the casinos the local government will have no power since this is an Ohio Constitution issue.
I've felt all along that one of the things that bothers me about this issue is that it changes the Ohio Constitution.
I'm voting NO on this attempt to get casinos. IMO there has to be a better way. I just get frustrated when these issues are always filled with hidden traps.
I too will vote no and for many reasons already listed. I don't mind having casinos in Ohio but this shouldn't be a constitutional amendment and it shouldn't be allowed to ban/block charities, churches, etc from running fundraiser casino nights.
I heard it straight from the first horseman of the apacolypse himself just this past Saturday, Moedude missing him isn't enough and he's going to stay in retirement!
For all you Church Festival fans, a minor detail in Issue 3 that is not being given a lot of news coverage is the fact that this issue:
Another interesting piece to this issue:
So if your local community wants to establish some special zoning laws near the casinos the local government will have no power since this is an Ohio Constitution issue.
I've felt all along that one of the things that bothers me about this issue is that it changes the Ohio Constitution.
I'm voting NO on this attempt to get casinos. IMO there has to be a better way. I just get frustrated when these issues are always filled with hidden traps.
This is why I'm voting no. There has been talk of the casino in Columbus being in the Arena District. Needless to say both Nationwide Realty Investors (who own most of the Arena District) is opposed. My question is, the Arena Dist. has basically overtaken Capital Square as the center of business in the city. It's the by far the most desirable office space in central OH. Why would you risk upsetting that influx of tenants into downtown? Because in my mind the prospect of a casino and a bunch of tourists running around down there isn't going to be a selling point to convince a law firm or advertising agency or whatever to move into the neighborhood.
I'm voting NO on this attempt to get casinos. IMO there has to be a better way. I just get frustrated when these issues are always filled with hidden traps.
At this point there isn't a better way. If this issue doesn't pass, we lose more time and money. I'm not entirely happy with this particular ballot issue, but this is what we get for being so late to the table. Blame the religious zealots who have always opposed gambling in this state and have made it so difficult to get the ball rolling.
Linear Mode
