The recently formed anti-gambling group Voters in Charge wants Florida voters to determine if the state should have non-tribal casinos. It began a petition drive to place a constitutional amendment on the 2018 ballot that would require a statewide vote to authorize blackjack, craps, roulette and other casino-style games, removing the legislature’s ability to approve non-tribal casinos in Florida. The group needs 68,314 signatures to launch a review by the state Supreme Court.
The amendment would “ensure that Florida voters shall have the exclusive right to decide whether to authorize casino gambling in the state by making citizens’ initiatives the exclusive method of authorizing casino gambling.” Native American gaming compacts would not be affected.
Voters in Charge Chairman John Sowinski said, “People will agree or disagree about casino gambling. But regardless of your position, given the stakes involved and the money that the gambling industry puts into campaigns and lobbying, the people of Florida should have the final say on whether or not to legalize casino-style gambling.” Sowinski, who for years has led No Casinos, an Orlando-based organization associated with Central Florida theme parks and the Florida Chamber of Commerce, said polls indicate 70 percent of voters support Voters in Charge’s amendment. He said for the measure to become law, at least 60 percent of voters must approve it.
Sowinski said the future of the ballot initiative depends on the state Supreme Court’s ruling in another case, in which it will decide whether a horse racetrack in Gretna, Gadsden County, operated by the Poarch Creek Indians of Atmore, Alabama, can offer slot machines. Originally the track received a parimutuel license for rodeo-style barrel racing, under a 2009 law that determined slots can be offered at parimutuels. That was an expansion of a 2004 constitutional amendment approved by voters authorizing slots at seven existing horse and dog tracks and jai-alai frontons in Broward and Miami-Dade counties.
The 2009 law also expanded eligibility for slots to include facilities in “any other county pursuant to a statutory or constitutional authorization after the effective date of this section in the respective county.” The law went into effect July 1, 2010. Voters had rejected statewide casino-approval measures three times between 1978 and 1994.
Earlier this month the 1st District Court of Appeal ruled the legislature has to approve whether Gretna Racing can have slots. But the Supreme Court could allow Gretna to operate slots without legislative approval, determine legislative approval is required or rule that expanding slots to parimutuels outside Broward and Miami-Dade counties requires a constitutional amendment.
In Brevard, Lee, Hamilton, Palm Beach, and Washington counties, voters have approved referendums authorizing slots at local parimutuels. Also the Palm Beach Kennel Club has a lawsuit pending in the 4th District Court of Appeal challenging the Department of Business and Professional Regulation’s denial of its slots application. Under Voters in Charge’s proposal, a racino there would be banned without statewide approval.
Sowinski said he wants “to have a ready weapon” if the Supreme Court decides that no constitutional action is required for parimutuels outside Broward and Miami-Dade counties to add slots. He added, “We want to be positioned and ready so if there is a court decision that does not affirm that the people have the final say on this, that they’ve got an amendment that makes it abundantly clear on the ballot.”
Sowinski said he believes the state constitution already prohibits gambling not specifically provided for in the constitution. However, the group’s proposed amendment “clarifies that reading.” He said “murky case law in recent years” on gambling has complicated the issue.
