Unfortunately,
the Governor specifically excluded
slots-at-tracks as part of his "framework,"
expressing concerns about "over saturation" of
gaming, and instead proposed that the horse racing industry
receive substantial additional funding through a new impact
fee imposed on the new casino licensees. While the Governor
proposed a "framework" that could lead to his
support and approval of a gaming expansion proposal, he did
not offer up legislative language.
B.
Veto Session Begins
The
first week of the 2011 veto session began this week on
Tuesday, October 25 and ended on Thursday, October 27. The
second week of the veto session runs from Tuesday, November
8, through Thursday, November 10. After November 10, there
are no other scheduled session dates for the remainder of
2011.
C.
What Happened This Week
Very
little formal action took place on gaming
during the first week of the veto session. At the outset of
the week, the Senate President’s staff developed draft
legislation that they believed reflected the Governor’s
"framework" for viable and acceptable gaming
expansion, and filed it as Senate Amendment #1 to HB 747
(Link). Reflecting their continuing detachment from the
legislative process surrounding gaming, the Governor’s
office advised ITHA and others that Governor Quinn did not
play any role in developing the amendment, and would not
claim any ownership over the language. In short, any effort
to test the political viability of Quinn’s
"framework" would not enjoy involvement by the
Governor or his staff.
Ultimately,
Senate Amendment #1 to SB 747 (Link) was posted for a
"subject matter hearing" before the Senate
Executive Committee, which heard limited testimony on the
measure and took no vote on it.
Throughout
the week, there was a general expectation that a Senate
floor vote would occur on the Governor’s
"framework" proposal. It was expected that the
draft bill would fail, reflecting that the Governor’s
"framework" does not represent a politically
viable gaming expansion option. After that
"framework" proposal failed, it was further
expected that a new measure might emerge that included much
of the "framework," but also added back
slots-at-tracks. In short, all involved legislators and
stakeholders recognize that slots-at-tracks is an essential
ingredient to any gaming expansion bill that can pass the
legislature.
Despite
these expectations, no committee or floor votes occurred
this week on gaming expansion. Nonetheless, the non-viable
nature of excluding slots-at-tracks remains evident to all.
Senate President Cullerton ended the first week of the veto
session with the expressed intent to meet with Governor
Quinn next week, in his continuing effort to directly engage
the Governor in developing a politically viable gaming
expansion formula.
D.
Subsidies Versus Slots-At-Tracks
The
proposed alternative to slots-at-tracks -- a state subsidy
through the imposition of an impact fee on the new casinos
– has been flatly rejected by the horse racing industry in
favor of a long-term solution (slots-at-tracks) to allow the
industry to be self-sufficient. As ITHA members know,
slots-at-tracks is the successful formula other states have
used to ensure the long-term viability of horse racing. Any
subsidy option would not represent a long-term solution, and
would be fraught with the uncertainties of protracted
litigation and the annual appropriations process.
E.
Industry Agreement Faces Last-Minute Challenge By Arlington
For
the past 18 months, the entire Illinois horse racing
industry has had a firm commitment to a gaming expansion
bill that includes three critical components related to
horse racing: (a) agreed rates for purses out
of AGR from slots-at-tracks; (b) elimination of recapture;
and (c) guaranteed live racing opportunities.
ITHA President Campbell refers to these elements as the
"three Rs." The industry has stayed true to those
principles with signed agreements by all parties (all the
tracks and all the horsemen organizations). Those principles
are fully reflected in SB 744, which passed both chambers of
the General Assembly.
This
week in Springfield, Arlington Park Racetrack took
unilateral action in contradiction of this agreement, while
all other stakeholders reaffirmed their commitment to these
principles. Arlington sought to eliminate the live racing
guarantees – the "third R" -- applicable to
itself. ITHA and all other horse racing interests (all the
other tracks, and all horsemen groups) objected to this
Arlington effort, and presently ITHA and Arlington are in
discussions to resolve this matter. ITHA will keep the
membership informed on this important, and unfortunate,
development.
As
all horsemen know, slots-at-tracks is meritorious only as a
means to protect and promote Illinois horse racing, Illinois
horse breeding and related Illinois agri-business. It was
never intended to allow any track to primarily become a
casino, with limited and incidental horse racing. Live
racing guarantees are essential to protect that intent,
shared by most every supportive legislator, and ITHA will
remain vigilant in this regard. ITHA will only support a
slots-at-tracks proposal that includes the "3
R’s": (a) agreed rates; (b) elimination
of recapture; and (c)
live racing guarantees that have
been agreed upon. ITHA will aggressively oppose
any slots-at-tracks measure that does not include these
measures.
Links:
http://www2.illinois.gov/gov/Documents/Gambling%20-%20SB744/Gaming%20Presentation%20FINAL.PDF