Both houses of the Rhode Island legislature this week voted last week to put a proposed casino in Tiverton, along the state’s boundary with Massachusetts, on the November ballot. Governor Gina Raimondo signed the bill shortly thereafter.
If the voters approve the initiative, it would allow the casino’s owner to move its casino in Newport, the Newport Grand, to Tiverton, a town of 16,000 people just across the state line from Fall River, and change the name.
State Senator Walter Felag called the proposal an “offensive play in trying to preserve and maintain an important source of revenue for the state.” The state would collect 15.5 percent from gaming tables and 61 percent from video machines. The town of Tiverton would be guaranteed $3 million annually.
The proposal calls for a casino and 84-room hotel. Felag called the design for the two-story casino a modest one that would “fit into the fabric of the community.”
Senator Louis DiPalma, who voted against the bill, said, “I do not support the expansion of gambling. We absolutely do need the money but we have to figure out how to get the money in other ways. This is not a way to sustain our state economy.”
Lawmakers fear that the new casinos being built in Massachusetts will drain off some of the dollars produced by Rhode Island’s two casinos, which are the third largest source of revenue for the state government.
Twin River Management Group would operate the 85,000 square foot casino. Its chairman, John Taylor, recently told lawmakers that the casino would put at least $47 million annually and as much as $70 million into the state’s budget. His company also operates the state’s other casino, Twin River Casino, as well as operations in Mississippi and Colorado.
A recent study estimated that total state gaming revenue would increase 7.3 percent annually if the casino were moved, from $570.6 million this year to $615.5 million by 2021.
Senator Brett Pelletier, who voted against the measure, told Taylor “I don’t want to be left with a Newport Grand in 20 years. It’s not a nice place to be. And if it were, we’d still be talking about it being in Newport and not in Tiverton.”
To win approval, a majority of voters in the state AND a majority of voters in Tiverton would have to vote yes.
Meanwhile, the No Tiverton Casino group appears to be very quiet, although its Facebook page has about 330 likes. It last posted on February, well before the hearings in the legislature. Reporters have tried to contact the group, with no luck.
John Loughlin, a critic of the proposal and also a candidate for Congress, predicts more energy from the opponents later this year. “They’ll put [the measure] on the ballot to voters. I expect we’ll see more action from the opposition in the late summer or fall,” he told GoLocal News.
Newport resident Liz Taber, who has led efforts against increased gaming in her town, said that Tiverton is a much different place.
She told GoLocal News: “Tiverton is a much different animal. For starters, there’s not the level of competition with local business that we had, and they don’t have an existing building with that awful ‘SLOTS’ marquis. They’ve got their own set of issues, from having high property taxes, to folks trying not to get ‘malled’ with the proposal for a new one there. And remember, they voted for table games by an overwhelming margin — when a casino would be in Newport.”
She added, “Clearly, the yoke’s on the state for the gambling revenue, and Twin River’s playing the whole thing very strategically,” said Taber. “For starters, the town of Tiverton’s slated to get a guaranteed $3 million, where as Newport would have gotten $450,000.”
