Tuesday, September 22, 2009
The court allows residents to vote next year on a plan to put slot machines at racetracks.
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Racetrack slots were sidelined by a high court decision Monday, potentially throwing the state budget off balance by nearly $1 billion.
The ruling means video lottery terminals estimated to raise between $850 million and $933 million in taxes could be on hold until a vote is taken.
In a 6-1 ruling, the state Supreme Court ruled in favor of LetOhioVote.org, a committee of three private citizens that seeks to put the question on the November 2010 ballot. The group challenged Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner’s rejection of its petitions and won.
The court ordered Brunner to accept the group’s petitions, allowing the referendum process to go forward.
Spokesman Carlo LoParo said petitions would be resubmitted Monday. The court froze slots implementation as described in the state budget for 90 days to allow the group to collect the necessary number of signatures — 6 percent of voters in the last gubernatorial race — to go to the ballot.
If they succeed, the machines could be on hold until voters decide the question. LoParo said he is virtually certain enough signatures can be gathered by the deadline.
In their decision, justices overrode language that state lawmakers had attached to the slots plan that sought to shield the slots from such a vote. Gov. Ted Strickland authorized the machines by executive order and the Legislature included their proceeds as part of the state budget, which now faces a nearly $1 billion hole.
In a statement, Strickland said he was disappointed by the ruling and was evaluating what to do next.
The Ohio Lottery Commission held off its scheduled vote Monday on the rules of implementing slots. A deadline for track owners to submit their first vendor payments to the state passed last week, and two companies had already paid.
“It’s a little early to say right now what the impact will be,” Lottery Director Kathleen Burke said. “We’re looking at it, obviously disappointed in the ruling and we’ll see what happens. But we haven’t reached any decisions yet.”
The court rejected the state’s argument that the slots revenue was an “appropriation” that, by definition, is shielded from the referendum process.
In writing for the majority, Justice Terrence O’Donnell noted that the passages in the budget bill that describe the video lottery terminal plan are separate from the line item in the bill that directs money from the Ohio Lottery Commission to education.
The court said budget provisions can’t “merely relate” to appropriations and be shielded. The ruling specifically noted that it is not up to the court to worry about the impact of its decisions on the state budget.
“We are not unmindful of the effect our decision may have on the state budget, nor of the commendable efforts of the members of the executive and legislative branches of state government to fulfill their constitutional duties to balance the budget in Ohio,” the decision said. “However, our own constitutional duty is to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Ohio Constitution irrespective of their effect on the state’s current financial conditions.”