Nov

5

Some Want New Amendment for Areas that Voted No on Issue 3

Posted on November 5, 2009 at 6:16 pm by Madrigal Maniac Under Local, State | Print This Post | Email This Post |  


Those who opposed Issue 3 may not go down without a fight. As I posted previously, Rep. Clyde Evans wants a new constitutional amendment that blocks the four casino’s, sets the tax rate at 60% instead of 33%, and opens up the process to build casino’s to competitive bidding.

Today The Columbus Dispatch is reporting that some lawmakers want to exempt those who voted against Issue 3.

Community leaders also have suggested an amendment that would block casinos from any areas that did not vote for one, such as Franklin County.

Already, the idea is getting some high level support.

House Speaker Armond Budish, D-Beachwood, is open to the idea, a spokesman said, while Senate President Bill M. Harris, R-Ashland, will give it “serious consideration,” a spokeswoman said.

In the City of Columbus 55% of the voters opposed Issue 3 and in Franklin County the number was 58%.



Penn National President Tim Wilmott tried to blame this on the opposition creating myths about the casino proposal. So here’s my question Mr. Wilmott, are you saying that your 50 million dollar state of the art campaign worked everywhere else, just not in Central Ohio? Maybe we could see through the myths created by what Issue 3 media consultant Rex Elsass called a “presidential quality” campaign.

Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Toledo are wonderful cities. But I agree with Sen. David Goodman from New Albany.

…voters in Cuyahoga and Hamilton counties essentially decided to build a casino in Columbus. He said he’d like to see a new constitutional amendment to include local-control provisions “as soon as possible.”

Just maybe, this ain’t over yet.

Sources:
Casino foes vow to continue fight
Casinos finally hit payoff
Editorial cartoon by Jeff Stahler

Similar Posts (Sometimes):

  • Share/Bookmark

Comments

Leave a Reply | Basic HTML Allowed | Live Preview Below