The proposal on November's ballot for a Biddeford slots casino doesn't necessarily mean that the facility will end up in Biddeford. It could be built in Saco, Westbrook, Portland, Kennebunk, Yarmouth - or any community within 25 miles of the existing Scarborough Downs racetrack.
The casino promoters say they want to close Scarborough Downs and build a new harness racing track in Biddeford, along with a big hotel and slot machine facility. The question on November's ballot reads:
Do you want to allow a slot machine facility at a harness racing track in Biddeford and at a harness racing track in Washington County?"
But according to Danielle Fox, a legislative analyst for the Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee, that's not what the law says. In fact, the law doesn't mention Biddeford at all. It also doesn't require that a new racetrack be built (there is no harness racing track in Biddeford), and doesn't even require that the slots facility be located at a racetrack.
The law, if voters pass it in November, will allow the owners of Scarborough Downs to build a slot machine casino anywhere within 25 miles of the existing Scarborough Downs racetrack, in any community that agrees to host it by Dec. 31, 2013.
CasinosNO! and Rep. Linda Valentino (D-Saco) have written to Maine's Secretary of State urging him to change the wording of the proposed ballot question to accurately reflect what the law will do. We think voters need to know exactly what they are voting on. They should be voting on the actual law, not on campaign promises.
Of course, the bloviating spokeswoman for Biddeford Downs went on the attack and accused CasinosNO! of a "campaign ploy." Notice she didn't say we were wrong about any of the details of the bill. To the casino crowd, being honest and transparent are just a "campaign ploy." Apparently, Biddeford Downs would rather keep voters in the dark about the bill's actual details and its full implications.
Maybe the backers of the Biddeford casino really do want to build a new racetrack in Biddeford, along with a slots parlor. Maybe. But if the deal falls through or the developer behind the deal, Ocean Properties, pulls out (just like they recently pulled out of a deal to buy the Balsam's resort in New Hampshire), the owners of Scarborough Downs will still have plenty of options if this bill passes. They could open a slots parlor in Biddeford and shelve plans to build a new racetrack and hotel. Or they could approach any community within 25 miles of the track to try and get the slots parlor located there (no need to close or move Scarborough Downs).
If the developers of Biddeford Downs really intend to move their track to Biddeford and open a slots parlor there, why didn't they write a law that reflects that intent? And why are they so intent on making sure that voters don't know the full story?
For a copy of the letter from CasinosNO! to the Secretary of State, go HERE (pdf). Voters have until 5 p.m. Monday, Aug. 15 to send comments to the Secretary of State urging him to change the wording of the question to accurately reflect the intent of the legislation. Send your comments to sos.office@maine.gov Attn: Public Comment.
PO Box 4581 Portland, Maine 04112