The St. Tammany Parish council in Louisiana recently voted 8-6 to allow a voter referendum on a Slidell casino on the November 13 ballot. If the referendum succeeds, Peninsula Pacific Entertainment will build a $325 million casino resort near Slidell.
But now the council president and members face a pair of lawsuits. One suit is being amended following a judge’s denial of a petition to halt the council meeting. The other was filed by a group of citizens led by Pastor John Raymond of New Horizon Church in Slidell. Raymond, an elected member of the Republican Parish Executive Committee, said, “This might be the one thing that really stops this before it goes too much further.”
According to Raymond’s suit, the elected leaders of St. Tammany Parish are violating the Louisiana state constitution and state laws by voting on a casino location before amending a 1996 vote that prohibited gambling in the parish. “First, you’d have to have casino gambling passed in St. Tammany Parish parish-wide. Then you can figure out where to put it,” Raymond said.
Raymond’s attorneys, Josh and Ben Clayton, also stated the Louisiana Gaming Control Board must approve the transfer of the gaming license from Bossier City to Slidell. Peninsula Pacific Entertainment, developers of the proposed Slidell casino, wish to transfer their license from their shuttered DiamondJacks Casino in Bossier City to Slidell. Josh Clayton said, “The law does require that there be approval of this license transfer which is being proposed from a failed casino in Bossier City to the Slidell area.”
Raymond and the Claytons are concerned about language in the bill that allows the entire parish to vote on what happens in Slidell. They fear the casino issue is driving a wedge between east and west St. Tammany Parish.
“One of the concerns is that if it goes to a vote and the public votes for casinos in St. Tammany Parish or just in Slidell, then the underlying law will not be legitimate. It will be subject to attack,” Ben Clayton said.
Raymond noted western St. Tammany would gain all the financial benefits of a casino without having to deal with the negative aspects of the casino. He said voters in the west should not “be allowed to pimp out their sister in Slidell for 5 percent left on the bedside table.” He was referring to the 5 percent of net gambling revenue the casino has agreed to share with the parish, an estimated at $7.5 million to $9 million annually.
He added, “If they want to do it the right way, they need to send it back to Baton Rouge, have it done according to the Louisiana state constitution and we can vote on it next year. What’s the hurry? People can vote on it the right way and it will be a solid vote when everyone has skin in the game, not just East St. Tammany.”
Councilman Chris Canulette, whose district includes Slidell, criticized St. Tammany’s state legislators for the ballot language, which asks voters to say yes or no to a casino in that specific location, instead of a simple yes or no vote on casino gambling. That would have opened up the entire parish to the prospect of a casino. He said, “It’s a terrible thing to put something together to try to split the parish east and west. It ain’t close to being fair. There’s a dead skunk in the middle of the road, stinking to high heaven.”
Prior to the council’s vote, attendees quoted Thomas Jefferson, the bible and song lyrics. Faith-based opponents were joined by St. Tammany Parish Sheriff Randy Smith and Slidell Police Chief Randy Fandal who said they feared a casino would cause crime to rise. Several requested time for more study. Many business owners said the comps and freebies offered by the casino would hurt businesses just recovering from Covid-19.
Northshore Business Council Chairman Ross Lagarde said the group supports the referendum. He noted St. Tammany already is experiencing some of gambling’s social issues but not benefiting from any revenue. He cited a state-sponsored study that estimated Louisiana gamblers spend $255 million a year a year in Mississippi.
Council Chairman Mike Lorino said the meeting “proved this is a divisive issue whether that’s with the people or the council. The bottom line is, now we’ve passed it on to the people.”
