Broward, Miami-Dade set March 8 slots vote

FORT LAUDERDALE/MIAMI (FBW) – Voters in Broward and Miami-Dade counties will be asked to consider a referendum in each county to permit Las Vegas-style slot machines at seven pari-mutuel facilities after both county commissions approved separate deals with the pari-mutuels and agreed to add the measure to the March 8 ballot.

The actions come in the wake of the narrow adoption last November of constitutional Amendment 4 which authorized the two South Florida counties to put the matter before voters and promised to devote to education programs tax revenues from slots operations – estimated at $200-$500 million on $1 billion in gross annual revenues.

Calling it a “David versus Goliath” battle, gambling opponent Paul Seago urged churches to educate their members about the referendums. “Start spreading the message that this is coming in March and we’ve got to go out and do what we can to reject it,” Seago told Florida Baptist Witness.

In lopsided votes in which only one commissioner in each county opposed the referendums, county politicians rejected pleas to delay the vote from opponents who noted that the Florida Legislature still must enact legislation regulating slot machines and the legislative session will not begin until the very day county voters will consider the referendums.

Before the Broward County Commission voted Jan. 18 and the Miami-Dade County Commission voted Jan. 20, both counties reached agreements with the pari-mutuel facilities, including up-front compensation from the industry to off-set the costs of the elections, although, after learning it would be illegal to accept payment for the election costs, officials claimed that the money was not directly subsidizing costs, for the referendums.

Under terms of the agreements, three pari-mutuel facilities in Miami-Dade agreed to pay $4 million to the county and four facilities in Broward agreed to pay $2.5 million, none of which would have to be repaid if voters reject the slots referendums.

In Broward, pari-mutuels agreed to be taxed at 1.5 percent of slot revenues and 2 percent on revenue more than $250 million. Additionally, Dania Beach, Hallandale Beach and Pompano Beach – cities with pari-mutuels – would receive 1.7 percent of the revenues. In Miami-Dade, commissioners agreed to 1.25 percent tax for the first three years, 1.5 percent thereafter and 2 percent over $250 million. Both counties estimate revenues of approximately $10 million annually, with 6,500 slot machines in Miami-Dade and 10,000 in Broward.

“What I think you’re seeing in both Miami-Dade and Broward is a money grab,” said Seago, executive director of No Casinos, noting that Amendment 4 made no provision for the counties to profit from the slot machines.

Expanding gambling operations at pari-mutuel facilities to include Las Vegas-style slot machines is part of a concerted effort of the industry to assist those faltering operations, Seago noted. The combination of racing facilities with casinos is sometimes referred to as “racinos” – a term Miami-Dade County Manager George Burgess has used to describe the would-be expansion at Miami-Dade pari-mutuels.

In spite of strong support in both county commissions and overwhelming adoption of Amendment 4 in the respective counties last November – the measure was approved by 67 percent of Broward and 57 percent of Miami-Dade voters – some opposition to the slots referendums is emerging.

Mayors of three local jurisdictions have announced that they will oppose the slots referendum.

Broward County Mayor Kristin Jacobs voted against the measure and has pledged to campaign against the referendum, telling the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, “I’ll be speaking my mind and take the consequences. I’ve never shied away from standing up for what I believe in.” Jacobs said she is philosophically opposed to additional gambling.

Fort Lauderdale Mayor James Naugle told Florida Baptist Witness he opposes the referendum for “many reasons, but mainly because of the tremendous social cost that gambling has.” He also said that is a “bad deal” for Broward County to get only about 10 percent of the revenues “but we’ll get 100 percent of the social costs.”

Naugle, a member of First Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, noted that he would oppose slots even if the county was getting all the money.

Davie Mayor Tom Truex also opposes the slots referendum, according to the Sun-Sentinel.

Additionally, the Broward County School Board unanimously adopted a December resolution opposing the slots vote, urging the county commission to wait until the Legislature has acted. Another resolution may be offered as early as the school board’s Feb. 1 meeting, according to published reports.

Gambling advocates argue that adding slot machines to already existing pari-mutuel facilities will not mark a significant change in the gambling culture already present in the two counties, pointing also to Indian casinos and day cruise gambling ships. Supporters also note that the slot machines tax revenues would supplement state education funding.

Seago told the Witness county officials are “buying into the notion that this is money that is something for nothing.

“The culture of gambling convinces people that with just a little bit of luck and the right circumstances you’re going to get a lot of money for not much effort. And that’s what these commissioners see – the lure of money without them doing much. From their point of view, the only other way to get this kind of money is to raise taxes and no politician wants to do that. They see this as a sort of a quick fix for money.”

Seago also warned that the introduction of slot machines in South Florida will affect the rest of the state, including Tampa and Naples, because state law permits Indian casinos to have at their facilities whatever games are legal within the state.

Pointing to the state’s financial impact statement issued in connection with Amendment 4 which notes the negative consequences of increased gambling, Seago noted that the introduction of Las Vegas-style casinos in South Florida will harm the communities.

Also referenced in the Miami-Dade County manager’s recommendation to approve the slots referendum, the state financial statement noted in addition the increased government costs associated with regulating the facilities, “A second and perhaps more significant cost will be that related to an expected increase in problem gambling. With an increase in the overall level of gambling activity, the level of problem gambling will increase also. This will lead to a need for increased expenditures by state and local governments in several areas, including law enforcement (including impacts on the courts and jails/prisons), mental health and addiction treatment costs, and unemployment compensation costs, among others.”

Seago said the margins of victory in the two South Florida counties for Amendment 4 does not mean that the March slot referendum cannot be defeated, noting that voter turn-out in March will not be nearly as large as November and that voters were not focused on gambling expansion during the fall campaign.

The faith community will play a vital role in the anti-slots efforts, both Seago and Fort Lauderdale Mayor Naugle told the Witness.

Naugle, who hopes to contact area churches to enlist their support and will be working with Broward Mayor Jacobs to speak to groups opposing the referendum, said, “It’s going to be a low turnout election and a high turnout from people who are opposed to gambling could conceivably defeat it. It’s going to be tough, though.”

“Churches should get organized,” Seago urged. “Go to our Web site – www.nocasinosfl.com – download the material that’s there, copy it and pass it out. Tell all the members of the congregation and friends that this is coming to town.”