Saturday, February 11, 2012

Home

Cars

Jobs

Real Estate

The Slots Game: 'Another game on another day'

Critical moments, unintended consequences reverberate years later

By LIAM FARRELL, Staff Writer

Capital Gazette Communications

Published 08/22/10

One of the most prescient comments ever made in Maryland political history occurred during the 1963 legislative session.

File photo Gov. J. Millard Tawes fought for the abolition of slot machines during the 1963 General Assembly session. The heated debate featured speeches on morality and accusations of attempted bribery.

The Slots Game

The Sunday Capital today kicks off a three-part series called “The Slots Game” examining major turning points leading to the current situation with slot machines in Maryland.

After years of work to get slots up and running in Anne Arundel County, no levers have been pulled and voters now have another chance in November to send the whole process back to the drawing board.

Each part explores how expedient political decisions made to address circumstances at the time have conspired to produce unpredictable consequences for years to come.

• Today's story examines why politicians embraced a widely defined corridor for a slots parlor in Anne Arundel County rather than just putting one at a racetrack.

• Monday’s installment discusses how Magna Entertainment Corp. derailed the expectations of politicians and voters alike by failing to make a qualified bid.

• Tuesday’s story will look back at why the General Assembly had to make slot parlors conform to local zoning or risk dramatic political failure.

Find Us On Facebook

AP VIDEO more>>

Over a few weeks, the General Assembly had almost torn itself to pieces debating the proposed abolition of slot machines in Anne Arundel, Calvert, Charles and St. Mary's counties.

Getting rid of slots had become a priority for Gov. J. Millard Tawes, who had initially ascended to the chief executive spot with a political career largely as outside the public spotlight as the record of his namesake, U.S. President Millard Fillmore. The son of a blacksmith and a trained accountant, Tawes - who left the office with...

This story has expired!
You can purchase the full text in our news archives.

The rise and fall of slot machines

Here are some key dates in the evolution of slot machines, which remain one of the toughest issues in Maryland politics:

March 1963: The General Assembly agrees to begin a phase-out of Maryland’s slot machines over the next five years.
Jan. 15, 2003: Republican Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. is inaugurated as governor. Ehrlich’s four years would be defined by the battles surrounding his attempts to legalize slot machines.
Feb. 25, 2005: The House of Delegates passes a slots bill despite the well-known opposition of its leader, House Speaker Michael E. Busch, D-Annapolis. The legislation would have put slots within two miles of Baltimore-Washington Parkway but is not passed by the Senate.
Sept. 25, 2007: Gov. Martin O’Malley officially announces that his plan to fight a $1.5 billion deficit will include slots. The bill is modeled after the 2005 legislation that passed the House.
Nov. 16, 2007: In order to get more votes, the House of Delegates accepts an amendment mandating all slots locations have to comply with local zoning.
Nov. 19, 2007: O’Malley and legislative leaders sign the tax, health care and slot machine bills passed by the General Assembly during a 22-day special session meant to address a deficit.
Nov. 4, 2008: Almost 60 percent of voters approve a constitutional amendment authorizing up to 15,000 slot machines at five locations around the state. Anne Arundel County’s area includes both Laurel Park and Arundel Mills mall.
Feb. 2, 2009: The state and private companies release the bids for the five slots sites, with underwhelming results. Both Magna Entertainment Corp. and Cordish Cos. officials say they are proposing to place slots at Laurel Park and Arundel Mills, respectively.
Feb. 3, 2009: Magna says it is withholding required license fees because of uncertainty it would get the money back if proper zoning is not approved, throwing the legitimacy of its bid into doubt.
Feb. 12, 2009: The state Video Lottery Facility Location Commission rejects Magna’s bid on the grounds it has no discretion on when or how to collect license fees.
March 2, 2009: County officials introduce legislation that would create zoning for a slots venue at Arundel Mills.
March 11, 2009: A county Circuit Court judge rules against Magna’s challenge to the slots law, contending fee refunds are allowed under law. The Court of Appeals later says it has no jurisdiction on the case.
Aug. 6, 2009: O’Malley criticizes the lengthy debate on the council over slots zoning, asking horse industry officials to lobby the county for action.
Dec. 7, 2009: The state Video Lottery Facility Location Commission grants a slots license to the Cordish Cos. on the condition the Arundel Mills site gets proper zoning.
Dec. 21, 2009: The County Council passes the zoning regulations needed for the Arundel Mills slots site.
July 20, 2010: The Court of Appeals orders a referendum be allowed on the zoning legislation in November after enough citizens petition for it. The decision overturns a lower court ruling that had stopped the process.
Nov. 2, 2010: Anne Arundel County voters will get a chance to approve or defeat zoning for slots at Arundel Mills.

YOUR COMMENTS

RULES OF PARTICIPATION

If you encounter other problems, please email nlundskow@capitalgazette.com and include your name, username, and any errors or messages that are displayed. The more information you can provide, the better able we will be to assist you.

In order to post or vote on a comment, you must be signed in with a hometownannapolis account.

Take a look at a summary of Commenting Guidelines.

Report Abuse or Vote In order to allow the user community the ability to collectively rank the value of comments posted on the Capital Gazette websites we have implemented a thumbs-up/down system. All logged-in users may participate by voting up/down each comment. If others vote on your comment, your individual score will go up/down depending on the votes. Initially, everyone starts with a score of zero, and must earn credits to have significant voting weight. Individuals with higher scores will have more voting weight. 0 0

A they didn't mislead before the Sl - 2010-08-26 23:42:48

Some of you clearly do not know where that VLT is going. It will be 100 feet or less from the Food Court and take up the entire parking lot from Burlington Coat Factory to the Cenemark Theatre. But, hey, you are right it's not "in the mall". While we're it why don't we put in topless show girls too, after all those people in Vegas are all seniors right? Give me a break! The referendum for the AA location very clearly gave the requirement for the locatl community to have a say on the zoning. Prior to the vote, there was NOT one single article or announcement to the voters that Cordish was going to bid to put it at the AA Mall... remember...all those ads showed horse tracks, and save the ponies... remember? Then after the Slots pass suddenly here's Cordish with the Mall... saying our legislators knew... all you had to do was attend the county council meeting to hear everyone complain about the "bait and switch". Since our County Council did not listen to their people, now it will go to a vote by the residents of AA County in complete accord with the State Referendum, then we'll have a true and accurate count of the will of the voters. Don't you believe for a minute that if this moves forward, they are going to save you Tax $$$... name one time our politicians in MD, *EVER* lowered our taxes and didn't raise them anyway... oh wait, the last two sets of voting was "to save education, fire and police"... when are you folks going to stop buying into the lies of our over-spending elected officials... it's all about greed and finincial mis-management!

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

David Leazer - Hanover, MD - Karma: Neutral

offensive TV ad - 2010-08-25 23:50:47

First, I have no personal vested interest in the outcome of 'Question A' since I've never won at gambling and I don't shop at Arundel Mills. BUT, the condescending tone of that TV ad makes me want to vote FOR the item simply because they portray people who would frequent the slots facility as either lepers, 'undesirables, or deviants. "...so gamblers won't mix with shoppers and children". Of all the self-righteous 'holier-than-thou' drivel ever spoken! Who in the world do the 'opponents' of this question think they are that they perceive themselves as that much "better" than those who may choose slots as their recreation? The few times I have left my money in these places, the majority of the crowd was comprised of senior citizens or bus outings by social clubs. Sure wouldn't want them "mixing with shoppers and kids"! Get off your high horse!

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

Dave Moore - Arnold, MD - Karma: Terrible

Voters said yes already - 2010-08-25 11:31:11

I hope Question A is approved. If Question A is approved, the state gets $400 million annually for education and the county gets $30 million annually for improvements to schools and public safety - all without raising taxes. I can't afford to pay more taxes and the state and county can't afford to lose this revenue. The voters have said they want it and now we have to vote again to uphold existing law.

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

randy thomas - , - Karma: Neutral

Zoning for Slots would allow them i - 2010-08-23 14:26:11

To Deceptive Advertizement The zoning for slots is for the Regional Mall Complex and Arundel Mills Mall is the only one in the County which means the current zoning would allow slots inside the mall. The current plan is to put the slots parlor and two 7 story parking lots in the parking lot of the mall from the Burlington store to the movie theatre. A small alley way will separate the mall and the casino with easy walking access between the mall food court and the casino. Both the mall and the casino will be within the Arundel Mills Circle which is the single lane road which surrounds the mall.

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

Carol White - Hanover, Md - Karma: Neutral

Competitive bid - 2010-08-23 10:35:28

First the Capital should clearly present the ballot issue before the voters, any confusion, needs to be eliminated. Mr. Busch was right on in having a competitive bid for slot licensing. Mr. Miller's attempts limit location to tracks, increasing take by operators was his response to special interest campaign contibutions. Laurel, MDI the Jockey Club were able to bid, but could not come up with a deposit. I voted against slot and don't think gambling is the way to balance the budget. That being said, the voters supported the previous ballot issue. No on cares where the slots are located, they want the revenue, now. I do care the referendum, backed by special interests and their lobbyists, is blocking the will of the voters. The County attorney included Laurel as a potential site, why....who knows. If the ballot issue is defeated revenue will be lost for at least another two years, $700 million. Cordish has the license, it is not going to lose it. MDI/Penn National are ineligible for a second license without changing the Constitution. If ballot issue is defeated Laruel will not be able to have slots anyway. The circus is still in town.

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

harry trampolini - severna park, MD - Karma: Excellent

Deceiptive Advertizement - 2010-08-23 08:48:27

This whole campaign against the slots at Arundel Mills took on the look of a real political campaign when the first ad hit the airwaves.
Instead of laying out the true facts against the slots palor the group had to start off with a truly deceptive / false add.
The ad makes it appear that the slots would be right in Arundel Mills Mall showing shoppers walking around while stating how this was a terrible idea.
We had company in from out of town who knew nothing of this debate and they asked after seeing the ad why we wanted the slots in the mall after explaining the truth they found the ad funny. I really don't care one way or the other about slots and when this finally gets resolved Maryland as always will be three years behind the other states but come on can't we atleast have the TRUTH told in the ad s??

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

len bender - glen burnie, md - Karma: Neutral

Last line - 2010-08-22 21:22:50

That's the Capital for you. Well I guess the best thing to do is read the ballot question before I vote. Again! Thanks Capital! You guys and girls are the best. As for everyone that seems to think that the people of Anne Arundle county are stupid and cannot or will not read. Why don't you keep your opinion to yourself and let us worry about Anne Arundle County. Thanks

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

A Jones - Not naptown but Annapolis, md - Karma: Good

about the last line - 2010-08-22 20:41:26

If you vote for Question A, the zoning bill will pass and David Cordish will be allowed to build a casino at Arundel Mills. If you vote AGAINST Question A, the zoning bill fails and David Cordish can not build a casino at Arundel Mills. It is that simple.

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

Charles Levay - Severn, Md - Karma: Neutral

LAST LINE IS WRONG - 2010-08-22 19:23:09

The last line of the story is wrong. Voting against the measure doesn't "save" Arundel Mills, it will overturn the county zoning bill that match the state law...in essence, screwing things up again.

Question A in NO WAY mentions Arundel Mills as doing so would misrepresent the issue at hand.

Vote FOR QUESTION A!!!

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

Christopher Masak - Laurel, MD - Karma: Good

behind - 2010-08-22 18:33:46

so much time has been wasted, the vote should be to bring full casino gambling to the race track. but in any case, gambling is legal in md. unless the lottery is not considered gambling. I guess it depends on who pays the most to get the license from the state to operate a casino.

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

Pat Bukowski - Odenton, Md - Karma: Neutral

Last line is wrong - 2010-08-22 10:45:41

How unfortunate that the Capital got the last line wrong. The ballot question before the voters in November is not to approve or defeat zoning at Arundel Mills ONLY. It is to overturn the zoning bill passed by the County Council that allowed slots at Arundel Mills or at Laurel Race Track. So if the voters approve the ballot question, there will be no slots at Arundel Mills AND THERE WILL BE NO SLOTS AT LAUREL. Capital, please get this stuff right so the voters can't claim they didn't know what they were voting for.

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

Mary M - Annapolis, MD - Karma: Neutral

Pay close attention - 2010-08-22 07:10:22

to the last line in the story. The upcoming vote is only to approve or disapprove slots for the Arundel Mills location. The Advertisement that has been playing on TV lately would have you believe that, if the location in Arundel Mills is shot down in November that the slots parlor will be built at Laurel Park. Such is NOT the case.

I probably would not go to either place if it were built, but I do become incensed at people who would falsly advertise, making the assumption that I am too stupid to know what they are up too. Since I don't live in AA county I cannot vote, unfortuantely, but if I could I would have to vote to approve the Arundel Mills location for the reasons I state here.

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?

Russ Patterson - Stevensville, MD - Karma: Neutral