Lincoln voters oppose making Twin River a casino

Lincoln voters have shot down two nonbinding referendum questions about possible expansion at the Twin River gaming facility in a poll that holds no legal weight but could make any future effort to increase gambling in the town more difficult, according to the politician who posed the question.
The Nov. 10 referendum asked voters their opinions on two issues regarding the future of the former Lincoln Park – whether they supported a move to a full-scale casino at the facility and whether they wanted to see 24-hour gaming at the facility. Both questions were defeated soundly, with voters rejecting the questions by a 59- to 41-percent margin and a 65- to 35-percent margin, respectively.
Town Council President Jeremiah O’Grady, who pushed to put the questions before voters, said that the large margins of defeat showed that voters in Lincoln were largely against any expansion of gambling, an idea that has not been formally proposed but has been discussed by various state legislators. He pushed for the referendum questions because he saw what he called an “incremental march” to a full-fledged casino taking place and he wanted the town to have a say before discussions moved any further.
“All of this type of activity was taking place without local input or approval,” O’Grady said. “Rather than sit around and wait be asked, we were going to seize the initiative and give input.”
But Patti Doyle, a spokeswoman for Twin River, said last week that the proposal of expanding to a full-fledged casino or lengthening the facility’s hours of operations is not a proposal Rhode Islanders should expect anytime soon, at least of Twin River’s accord.
Doyle noted that the facility is in the final stages of a $220 million upgrade that has seen the opening of an events hall and new dining and entertainment facilities and an expansion of video lottery terminals from 3,002 to 4,752.
The renovations and additions are the main focus of Twin River’s owners, and no plans to move to a full-fledged casino have been made known.
“We’ve been very busy … getting ourselves in the groove of the new Twin River,” Doyle said. “It’s vastly different.”
Doyle also stressed that Twin River opted to not partake in any “educational” public relations campaign leading up to the non-binding referendum questions, noting that the one-and-a-half-month time period between the announcement of the referendum and the vote was not enough time to effectively try to persuade voters.
However, when pressed by a reporter on whether the facility had ruled out the option of expanding either the hours or operation of the facility because of the vote, Doyle said: “While we certainly respect opinions, that outcome is non-binding.”
The issue of expanding the gambling operations at Twin River has been a topic discussed at the General Assembly in recent years. The state is gearing up for what promises to be a difficult budget, with a nearly $400 million deficit projected for 2008. The budget gaps have been blamed largely on decreasing revenue, a factor that is contributed to by less-than-expected state returns from both Twin River and Newport Grand.
Sen. Paul E. Moura, D-East Providence, has vowed to introduce legislation this upcoming session to expand hours of operation at Twin River. Other legislators have discussed expanding the facility to a casino to add revenue to the state’s coffers and cut off any future losses that could arise from Massachusetts’ three proposed casinos.
But while the hours could be changed by a simple vote by the legislature, any move to a full-time casino would require a constitutional amendment to be voted on by the entire state, as was the case with the ultimately ill-fated Harrah’s Entertainment-Narragansett Indian casino that was shot down by an overwhelming majority of the state’s voters.
O’Grady said that the vote this month ultimately says that any efforts to plant a full-fledged casino in Lincoln could face heavy resistance. If it were shot down by Lincoln voters, the potential expansion would die because the state’s constitution requires any casino to approved by a majority of the host community.
“The turnout was pretty high, the margin of defeat for both questions was high as well,” O’Grady said. “In addition, the margin of defeat was pretty consistent across the [four] polling places in town. It’s not that the voters immediately around Twin River voted, ‘No’ and the rest of the town voted ‘Yes.’
“If Twin River or the state wants to change the mind of voters … they’ve got their work cut out for them,” he added. •

No posts to display