Shawn Scott’s campaign to persuade voters to allow him to be the only person to build a third casino in Maine is just two weeks away from being decided by the ballot box. Question 1 would authorize a casino in York County.
Scott, an out-of-state gaming entrepreneur with several companies based off-shore, was the man who introduced casino gaming to Maine, back in 2003. Now there are two casinos, in Bangor and Oxford. Scott wants to be allowed to build a third, in York County. That’s in a state of 1.3 million.
Although Scott’s sister, Lisa Scott, spearheaded the $4.3 million effort to qualify a casino initiative, she eventually left as the official head of Progress for Maine, she left when the state’s ethics commission began peppering her for documents relating to the donors for the campaign. Shawn Scott then became the public face of the Question 1 effort.
Critics accuse Scott of trying to buy an election, get a license, and then sell it for a big profit, as he did in 2003 when he sold his rights to a casino to Penn National Gaming.
Maine Governor Paul LePage has blasted the casino proposal, calling it “a stacked deck,” and adding, “It’s a stacked deck. Once again, Maine’s referendum process has been hijacked by big money, out-of-state interests hoping to pull the wool over your eyes.”
He charges that the third casino will merely drain away profits from the two existing casinos, without generating any new economic activity. The campaign claims that a York County casino will create $45 million in state tax revenue. It would create 2,165 permanent jobs and 2,767 temporary construction jobs, while generating $64.4 million in earnings from operation of the casino, and more than $100 million in earnings from construction.
The Question 1 campaign is being shepherded by the same consulting firm that took the Brexit vote over the finish line in Great Britain about a year ago. The campaign has already spent $1.5 million on the election.
Last week the Progress for Maine announced a new supporter: the Aroostook Band of Micmacs. The campaign unveiled an ad featuring the band’s Vice Chief Silliboy, who declares, “I believe that a gaming facility in Southern Maine would benefit most of the people throughout the state,” and claims the casino will enable his tribe to pursue new economic development.
Campaign spokesman Rebecca Foster commented, “We’re excited to have the support of the Aroostook Band of Micmacs, particularly since Question 1 will create new economic benefits for Native American tribes and residents throughout Maine,” adding, “A gaming and entertainment center in York County creates so many opportunities for taxpayers, job seekers and business owners across the state. We hope Maine voters will join us in voting Yes on Question 1 to keep jobs, tourism and tax revenue in Maine.”
The Aroostock Band, and other tribes in the state receive funding from any casino operating in the state. Question 1 would give them $1 million a year. Other beneficiaries would be veterans, property tax relief and senior citizens.
Scott’s career has been controversial. He has opened casino hotels and racinos, but also been denied license and sued multiple times. His career in gaming appears to have been born in the 2003 campaign when voters approved what would eventually become the Hollywood Slots in Bangor.
He sold that license for $51 million after state regulators raised “significant issues about the application including the fact that some of the people intimately involved had significant criminal records.”
Several years later he pulled off a similar feat in Louisiana where he obtained the rights for a casino after spending $10 million and sold it for $130 million.
Scott altered his playing field to the international level—until last year when it was unveiled that he had been behind an effort in neighboring Massachusetts. An effort that fell afoul of Bay State ethics regulators for failing to report the source of donations—a similar mishap to what has befallen the Maine campaign.
Commission on Governmental Ethics and Campaign Practices has been investigating the campaign’s finances for several months, and will make a recommendation by October 31, which could include fines for providing inaccurate or late reporting information.
Scott was asked last week on a call-in radio show if he intends to sell the license if his efforts succeed. He said he intended to operate the casino himself.
He said, “We don’t have any intention of cashing out and leaving. We want to be here for the long haul, we want to develop this project.”
When the radio talk host asked why Scott sold his license in 2003, he answered “Bangor turned out to be a win-win for everybody and it’s producing still $37 million a year in tax revenue. Sometimes in life businesses don’t work out but in the Bangor case that was a win-win for everyone.”
Maine lawmakers want to change the referendum process, calling the Progress for Maine campaign the “poster child” for a process that has jumped the rails.
Senator Roger Katz, chairman of the Legislature’s Government Oversight Committee, declared last week that the campaign twists the Maine Constitution’s intent when it created the referendum.
“It is wealthy interests, often from out of state, that are now the movers and negotiators of citizens’ initiatives and we really need to get back to the basics of why we have this process in the first place,” said the senator. His committee has invited Scott and others backing the initiative to appear before it, but they declined.
Senator Katz called it “kind of ironic” that Scott would refuse to speak to his committee, but would go on a radio talk show. He ticked off Scott’s run-ins with gaming regulators in several other states and in Thailand, and said his efforts in Maine “ought to make Maine people’s blood boil.”
Scott’s initiative is written in such a way that only he or his company could apply for a York County gaming license, which some experts estimate could be worth $150 million.
This year several lawmakers failed to pass two bills that would have amended the initiative process, including increasing the number of signatures required to put one on a ballot, and to require that the signatures come from a wider geographical distribution.
Some legislators point out that the legislature could amend or repeal any measure passed by initiative.
Not all lawmakers oppose Question 1. In an op-ed last week Tom Saviello, a state senator and Lance Harvell, a state representative, declared, “We can’t turn down new state revenue, 5,000 jobs, a boost in tourism and help for the struggling harness racing industry.”
They added, “There will be no hidden taxes. If anything, property taxes may go down as a result of this initiative. Question 1 conjures up $11 million a year for Maine’s Department of Education, $3 million for tuition relief, $3 million in property tax relief, $2 million to the General Fund, and more than $1 million for drug education and addiction prevention. This is meaningful revenue coming at no expense to the state nor the citizens of Maine. Casinos already give the state roughly $50 million a year in similarly tax-free returns, and we now have the chance to almost double that.”
