Home | Back

Casino question may be on ballot again in May

Share_print Print Story    |    Comments    |   

January 24, 2010

by Marc Kovac

Capital Bureau Chief

Columbus -- Lawmakers in the Ohio House and Senate Jan. 20 moved on a ballot issue to change the location of a voter-approved Columbus casino.

But at least one lawmaker says he'll break ranks and vote against placing the constitutional amendment before voters if his hometown is not included.

In November, voters approved allowing casinos at specific sites in Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati and Toledo.

Since then, Columbus officials have been in discussions with casino representatives with hopes of relocating the site in that city.

To do that, the issue would have to be put to voters statewide again.

Lawmakers have about two weeks to act on the resolution to place the issue before voters in May.

Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman and Tim Wilmott, president of casino owner Penn National Gaming, told Senators Jan. 20 that they have agreed to an alternate site west of Columbus.

If OK'd by voters, Wilmott said development of the site could begin before the end of the year, with the casino open in late 2011.

"We believe, given the fact that revenues from all four casinos will support all 88 counties, voters in the other parts of the state... will want all of the facilities up and running as quickly as possible and for all 34,000 jobs to be filled by Ohioans," Wilmott said.

The Senate committee moved the joint resolution, and a floor vote is expected next week.

Companion legislation on the issue also was introduced in the Ohio House Jan. 20.

Both focus solely on the Columbus site change.

"It does not address the issue of whether casino gambling should be authorized in the state of Ohio," Coleman said of the Senate resolution. "That issue was settled in November."

During the committee hearing, state Rep. Bob Hagan, D-Youngstown, unsuccessfully urged the Senate committee to consider adding a potential Youngstown casino site to the resolution.

Hagan said he would vote against the resolution, if it arrives on the House floor without the Youngstown amendment -- and he said he would work to ensure other Mahoning Valley lawmakers do the same.

But leaders of the Democrat-controlled Ohio House and Republican-controlled Senate, are not supporting the Youngstown amendment.

"The Mahoning Valley and Youngstown are hurting, as is the case with communities all over the state," Democratic House Speaker Armond Budish told Statehouse reporters following the Jan. 20 House session. "Rep. Hagan is looking for ways to enhance economic development in Youngstown and in the Mahoning Valley and is pursuing a variety of economic development opportunities.

I believe he views this as one of those opportunities."

He added, "I don't believe that will be part of the resolution that goes forward tomorrow."

Marc Kovac is the Dix Newspapers Statehouse Bureau chief. E-mail him at mkovac@dixcom.com or on Twitter at OhioCapitalBlog. His Capital Blog can be found online at blogs.dixcdn.com/capitalblog/.




Comments
By Posting to this site, you agree to our Terms of Service Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed. Hudsonhubtimes.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.

Login above or Register to comment.
 0 Total Comments Home | Back