Large opposition campaign assails Ohio casino initiative

By MARC KOVAC

VINDICATOR CORRESPONDENT

COLUMBUS — Ohio voters have been asked four times since 1990 whether the state should allow casinos within its borders.

In 1990, 1996 and 2006, a majority of residents who cast ballots voted “no.” The most recent defeat, during the 2006 gubernatorial contest, promised slot machine revenue-backed college scholarships; it failed 43 percent-57 percent.

Enter No. 4, a constitutional amendment that appears on the November general election ballot. It’s Issue 6, the last of five to be determined by voters (with Issue 4 removed at the request of its petitioners).

If approved, the amendment would allow the construction of a $600 million casino complex, located roughly between Columbus and Cincinnati in Clinton County.

Its backers, an out-of-state entertainment company and two Ohio entrepreneurs (with the former holding a controlling interest in the project), say the new development will lead to the creation of thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in tax revenues for state, county and local governments.

“We think it’s going to help a struggling economy and provide hundreds of millions of dollars (and) sorely needed jobs and revenue needed to help Ohio’s county governments,” said Rick Lertzman, one of the Ohio partners promoting the project.

Its opponents include another out-of-state casino company that operates in neighboring Indiana and a conservative group long opposed to such gambling expansions in Ohio. They are urging “no” votes, based on the wording of the ballot issue and resulting loopholes, and on the social and economic costs posed by increased gambling activities.

“The idea of putting a casino here has been voted on three times in our state and in all cases voted down,” said state Sen. Ron Amstutz, a Republican from Wooster and vocal opponent of the casino project and other gambling expansions. “In those situations, a few people in Ohio would have gotten rich. In this case, a few people out of Ohio in another state would get rich, which is an even a worse idea if you think of it from that perspective.”

Read the full story Monday in The Vindicator and on Vindy.com.