Marylanders to cast their vote on racing industry’s
future.
The future of Maryland’s Thoroughbred industry hinges on
a referendum to appear on the ballot in the statewide general
election that will take place on November 4.
The referendum will allow voters to decide FOR or against the
slots program crafted in a special session of the state legislature
in November 2007.
Technically, it’s a two-step process. Two slots bills passed
the legislature and were signed by Governor Martin O’Malley.
House Bill 4 amends the Maryland constitution, authorizing the
state to issue up to five slots licenses, for a maximum of 15,000
video lottery terminals (slots), within five specified areas
of the state. The constitutional amendment is the question that
voters will decide in the referendum.
When the referendum is approved, the accompanying legislation,
known as Senate Bill 3, will take effect. This bill establishes
the specifics of the slots program, and allows the state to proceed
with its implementation.
Of paramount importance to the racing industry: Breeders and
horsemen (Maryland-bred Fund and Maryland Thoroughbred Purse
Account) will receive a proportionate share of revenue from each
of the five slots sites.
Only two race tracks are eligible for slots licenses: Laurel
Park (in Anne Arundel County) and Ocean Downs (a harness facility
in Worcester County, near the state’s largest beach resort,
Ocean City).
However, Laurel and Pimlico are eligible to receive matching
grants for capital improvements whether or not Laurel becomes
a slots site. Timonium is slated to receive an annual $1 million
allocation for five years with no matching fund requirement.
Areas in which slots sites may be located are:
•
Allegany County, on state property located within Rocky Gap State
Park.
•
Anne Arundel County, within two miles of Maryland Route
295.
•
Baltimore City, in a non-residential area within a half-mile
of Maryland Route 295 on property owned by the city on date of
application for VLT operator license.
•
Cecil County, within two miles of I-95.
•
Worcester County, within one mile of Route 50 and Route 589.
The program could move quickly after the referendum passes, because
the deadline for submitting bids for VLT operation licenses is
February 1, 2009.
Licensees will be required to pay a fee of $3 million for each
500 VLTs included in their bid (these fees accrue to Education
Trust Fund).
Slots licenses will be awarded by a Facility Location Commission
composed of seven members; elected officials are prohibited from
serving. The governor will appoint three individuals to this
commission, and the Senate president and House speaker will each
name two appointees. VLTs are to be owned or leased by the state.
A nine-member State Lottery Commission will ultimately oversee
the program.
Here’s The question.
Note: Language to appear on the ballot does not mention horse
racing. But the racing industry’s share is set by law if
the referendum passes.
Question 2?–?Constitutional Amendment
Authorizing Video Lottery Terminals (Slot Machines) to Fund Education
Authorizes the State to issue up to five video lottery licenses
for the primary purpose of raising revenue for education of children
in public schools, prekindergarten through grade 12, public school
construction and improvements, and construction of capital projects
at community colleges and higher education institutions. No more
than a total number of 15,000 video lottery terminals may be
authorized in the State, and only one license may be issued for
each specified location in Anne Arundel, Cecil, Worcester, and
Allegany Counties, and Baltimore City. Any additional forms or
expansion of commercial gaming in Maryland is prohibited, unless
approved by a voter referendum.
(Enacts new Article XIX of the Maryland Constitution)
DOLLARS AND SENSE
Seven percent of the revenue from slots will go to Maryland’s
racing industry.
Of the racing industry’s share, 80 percent is directed
toward Thoroughbreds and 20 percent to Standardbreds.
The Thoroughbred portion will be split on an 85-15 percentage
basis between the purse account and Maryland-bred Fund.
Maryland’s Department of Legislative Services estimates
that total revenue from slots in fiscal year 2013 will reach
nearly $1.362 billion.
If that estimate holds true, purses at Maryland’s Thoroughbred
tracks will be enhanced by $59.4 million and the Maryland-bred
Fund will expand by $7.3 million.
If not slots, then what?— ballot committee leader states
the case
Fred Puddester is chairman of For Maryland For Our Future, the
ballot committee that is leading the lobbying efforts for the
slots referendum to take place in Maryland on November 4.
A career financial guru, Puddester served as Secretary of
the Maryland Department of Budget and Management under former
Governor Parris N. Glendening, and currently is senior associate
dean of finance and administration at Johns Hopkins University’s
Zanvyl Krieger School of Arts and Sciences. He joined the Krieger
School in 2007 after serving for seven years as the university’s
executive director of budget and financial planning.
Before going to Hopkins, Puddester worked for 21 years in Maryland
state government. He holds a bachelor of arts degree from the
University of Vermont and a master’s degree in public policy
from Rutgers University.
Earlier this year, Governor Martin O’Malley appointed Puddester
to serve as chairman of the Maryland Stadium Authority. Puddester
serves also as a member of the State Inter-Agency Committee on
School Construction and as a public member of the General Assembly’s
Spending Affordability Committee.
Puddester was interviewed by Mid-Atlantic Thoroughbred editor
Lucy Acton in late August.
Obviously, one of the most important things people in the Maryland
horse industry are interested in finding out from you is?–?what
can we do to help the referendum succeed?
You can help by telling everyone you know why it’s important
to vote FOR slots.
The main point to be made here is that more than half of the
money is going to go to fund education?–?which is critically
important. That’s a point that’s not fully known
out there in the public yet. We have to make sure folks really
understand that.
Another important point to mention is that what we’re really
doing is recapturing money that is being spent by Marylanders,
but just going out of state.
The nonpartisan legislative staff that looked at this constitutional
amendment has estimated that over $400 million is being spent
by Marylanders in West Virginia and Delaware. That doesn’t
even include the new facilities that have opened in Pennsylvania.
What we’d like to do is keep that money in Maryland?–?build
schools in Maryland instead of building schools in Pennsylvania,
West Virginia and Delaware.
Of course it’s critically important for the horse industry.
Our breeders, our owners and trainers, are just getting killed
by the amount of money going to the racing industries in surrounding
states. They really need the revenue from slots for their survival.
There was a recent study?–?a very misleading study?–?that
indicated that a lot of the horses who race in Maryland are owned
by people from out-of-state. The argument was made that this
money from the slot machines is actually going to go out of state.
Nothing could be further from the truth. While the horse owner
may be from out of state, the breeders, the trainers, the people
who take care of the horses, are all here in state. And in fact
if we had higher purses, we would be able to attract more business
and activity for the horse industry here in Maryland.
If you followed this researcher’s logic, then you wouldn’t
want to have a JPMorgan move 1,000 finance jobs into Maryland
because JPMorgan is a New York company. Of course we’d
love to have that happen, because it would create jobs for Maryland
citizens, and spur economic activity for our retail outlets and
improve the economy of the state in many ways.
The slots program will also, importantly, protect our state budget.
The governor and the legislature addressed what is called the
structural deficit last fall. And they did so by making some
very difficult and sometimes unpopular choices. They raised taxes.
They cut the budget by $1.9 billion. Then they passed this constitutional
amendment [to establish a slots program].
If we don’t pass this referendum, it’s going to leave
a $660 million hole in the state budget. My experience of 21
years in state government, in the budget arena, tells me there
are only two other ways to solve that $660 million deficit?–?that
is to raise taxes, or cut the budget.
With people trying to deal with higher gasoline and food prices,
high interest rates, now is not the time to place an additional
tax burden on them.
When it comes to cutting the budget?–?the governor and
legislature have already cut the budget by $1.9 billion. And
while the public may not generally know this, more than two-thirds
of the budget in the state goes to education and health care.
If you were to try to cut $660 million from the budget, it would
obviously mean cutting education and health care; that does not
seem like the way we should go.
Those are the reasons why it’s critical to support this
referendum.
The ballot language, as crafted by Maryland’s Secretary
of State, John McDonough, focuses on education with no mention
of the racing industry or other entities that will share in the
proceeds. [A court ruling later added one word, thus the final
language states that the primary purpose is raising revenue for
education.] Would you comment on that?
The constitutional amendment passed by the General Assembly was
very specific that the primary beneficiary of the revenue generated
would go to education. That is the plain language of the constitutional
amendment that passed the legislature. The Secretary of State
had little or no leeway in drafting the language. He is required
to stick to the wording in the bill that passed.
Opponents suggest that the voters will be confused by the language
and even go further to say that Marylanders are “ill-informed.” I
think this is a great disservice to the citizens of this state.
People have been reading about and studying this issue for over
a decade. I am confident, unlike the opponents of the referendum,
that they are in fact a very informed group when it comes to
this proposal. Further, I am confident when they weigh the alternatives
to the referendum, namely higher taxes or massive cuts to education
and other state programs that help our neediest citizens, they
will be supportive of the referendum.
How are the lobbying efforts going?
Quite well, I think. We have a broad coalition. It’s a
grassroots coalition that has reached throughout the state. In
addition to the horse industry, we’re supported by the
teachers, the Maryland Association of Counties?–?those
are the local elected officials who, by the way, have to balance
a budget every year; they understand the financial aspects of
this referendum. The Maryland Chamber of Commerce is behind us,
the Washington Board of Trade, the Realtors, the Retail Association
. . . law enforcement organizations have joined the coalition.
All of these organizations have been very supportive?–?going
out and talking to groups. We have a field operation that’s
going door-to-door, giving out information and trying to let
people know exactly what’s at stake.
Once again, what that stake is–?if we don’t pass
this referendum, it’s either cuts to education and health
care or higher taxes.
How many people are working on this referendum effort?
Hundreds. There’s a core group that meets on a regular
basis. We have a growing field staff. It started out small, but
obviously it’s growing. A lot of people in these various
groups I mentioned, all over the state, are helping us.
If there’s a particular group that wants to have a forum?–?they
want a pro-referendum person and an anti-referendum person?–?obviously
I can’t be at every one of those events, so we rely on
the Chamber (of Commerce) and the Teachers’ Association.
The beauty of it is, it’s not just me going out, but it’s
the small businessman who understands what an additional tax
burden would mean both to himself and to his customers. It’s
a local teacher who sits in a classroom, who understands what
this referendum means to education funding?–?how it will
affect the numbers of kids in her classroom.
Will the lobbying effort become more intense as the referendum
gets closer?
Yes. What you probably haven’t seen a lot of yet is the
field effort, with people going door-to-door. That will intensify
as we go into the fall.
Likewise, you are likely to see more presence in the media?–?especially
television and radio.
How will the field visits work? Will the volunteers spend time
talking to prospective voters?
We’re actually doing that now. The percentage of people
you get to talk to is lower in the summer, because people are
on vacation and out doing things. But it’s better than
we thought, the percentage of people we’re actually talking
to. They leave the literature, as you would do in any political
campaign. There’s been a generally positive response; the
folks we’ve gotten to talk to have been pretty positive.
More positive than you expected?
Yes, and we’re very encouraged by that.
For Maryland For Our Future is a ballot committee, is that right?
Can you explain how it works?
There’s a special category of committees that are set up
to support ballot initiatives. That’s what this is. It’s
not a particular candidate who is running for office but rather
a referendum. So this would be a question on the ballot, and
that’s what ballot committees are set up to support.
Can you talk about the constitutional amendment, how that works?
The legislature decided to put this in the constitution. To me
that decision makes sense. There are a lot of people who are
concerned about what they call the slippery slope. That is we’ll
start with slot machines and end up with something more expansive.
Well, if you have it in the constitution, that means you can
only change it by going back to the constitution again, which
I think is very unlikely.
What we’ll have on the ballot is the authorization of 15,000
slot machines, highly regulated, at five specific locations.
And that’s it. That’s all we’re really going
to see.
But the slots program really will have a measurable impact throughout
the state.
One other aspect of this has to do with open space. One of the
benefits of supporting the horse industry is recognizing the
value the industry brings by keeping so much open space in our
communities.
It has been estimated?–?and this is an amazing statistic.
We’ve had a land preservation program in the state budget
since 1969. That’s close to 40 years now. What that program
is supposed to do is keep the land in open space. The state has
been buying land. Yet, the open space that is preserved by the
horse industry is more than all the land that has been purchased
by the state.
The importance to what I would call the Maryland way of life,
when we have these open spaces and they don’t end up being
townhouses and strip malls, cannot be underestimated.
Another thing you hear: The estimate of how much money this would
raise is too high. That’s a criticism I hear frequently.
When you press opponents on that, they can’t tell you why
they think that way. They just say, “It’s too high.”
Well, there are two interesting things about that. The people
who did the estimate are a nonpartisan staff unit of the General
Assembly. These people have been studying this issue for almost
a decade. They are fiscal analysts, economists. It’s ironic
that the state comptroller (Peter Franchot) is one of those who
has criticized the estimate, because these same economists and
fiscal analysts actually help him do the estimates of state revenues
for income tax and sales tax. I have a lot of respect for these
people; I think they do a good job.
I’ve analyzed the numbers. I did revenue estimates for
almost two decades in state government, and was at one time actually
on the Board of Revenue Estimates, as Budget Secretary.
I think the estimate is conservative. I think the benchmarks
they used in terms of actual activity, when you compare them
to Pennsylvania and Delaware and West Virginia, are actually
low. So if anything, I think this will actually outdo them.
Another thing you hear is how it’s going to impact businesses
in the neighboring communities. I think all you have to do is
go over to Delaware and you’ll see that slots have actually
increased economic activity. Slots have not negatively impacted
the community around them.
In terms of things like crime?–?Tom Perez, Secretary of
the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, did
a study last year, including Delaware and West Virginia, and
his study indicated there was no increase in crime in the communities
where these facilities were located. Now, the opponents will
go back and dig up old studies across the country that indicate
there is increased crime. But what I look at is an apples to
apples comparison. Show me what happened in a community recently,
nearby, around a facility that is contemplated in this referendum.
To me, that’s exactly what Secretary Perez did; he looked
at neighboring states, last year, looking at facilities just
like those contemplated in this legislation, and he found no
increase in crime. That, to me, is an apples to apples comparison.
I’m not worried at all about an increase in crime. Once
again, we get back to one of the main points here, which is that
a big percentage of the players going to Pennsylvania, Delaware
and West Virginia are in fact Marylanders.
In your talk last May at the Maryland Horse Breeders Association’s
general membership meeting, you described how important it is
to question slots opponents on their facts.
As I’ve gotten into this, I’ve found that’s
one of the frustrating things. I’ve found they don’t
often have facts; they just make statements. They say the revenue
estimate is too high, yet they can’t tell me which assumption
that these nonpartisan experts who have been studying this issue
for decades have got wrong.
When I ask them: “What’s your alternative?”,
they don’t have one. They know that the alternatives are
cutting education funding or increasing taxes. But with one exception,
they don’t say that. I did get to do a debate with Hilary
Spence, who is a former county elected official in Talbot County.
And at the debate in Kent County, Hilary did say: “I think
we should increase taxes.”
You’ve got to give her credit for intellectual honesty.
She admits it’s one of the other two solutions. She didn’t
think you should cut education. But some of these people are
against this, but want to ignore the fact that if you don’t
have this, not only is the horse racing industry in peril, and
with it the open space and all those jobs and related economic
activity, but also the state budget is in peril.
How do you counter people who oppose slots on so-called moral
grounds?
I’ve never been a person who wants to tell someone else
what to do.
I just keep coming back to the fact that $400 million is already
being spent by Marylanders, but unfortunately it’s building
schools in Delaware and West Virginia. It’s not building
schools here.
So while there’s a half-dozen trailers outside the elementary
school in my neighborhood, some kid is sitting in a brand-new
school in Delaware, paid for by Marylanders’ money. I think
we need to keep that money at home.
I respect people who are against this on moral or religious grounds.
And I’m not going to criticize anyone for that. I’m
not going to challenge their moral or religious beliefs. However,
I will challenge them to tell me what the alternative is.
If you’re against this, I think it’s imperative that
you say what your alternative would be. Are you for increasing
income tax on Marylanders? Are you for cutting education and
increasing classroom sizes? Are you for cutting health care for
the less fortunate citizens of our state? Because those are the
choices.
I respect people who are against it, but I think they have to
indicate exactly how they would plug the $660 million hole in
the budget.
Maryland already has a lottery, as do some 45 other states throughout
the country. So it’s not unusual for a state to have a
large amount of its revenue coming from this activity. It’s
already happening. To suggest that it’s not happening avoids
the facts.
How have your efforts been impacted by the reluctance, or apparent
reluctance, of Magna (Laurel Park/Pimlico owner Magna Entertainment
Corp.) to support the referendum?
I think at the end of the day we will have a budget sufficient
to fund an aggressive campaign to educate the people of Maryland
on the importance of this referendum.
We’ve gotten a lot of support, in terms of people and money,
and we continue to get that support; I won’t single out
one organization or another. Like the anti-referendum people,
we will disclose our financial backers and the dollar amounts
of their contributions, as called for in the legislation. That
will happen in October.
Remember, this is a two-step process. The first step is getting
the referendum passed, which authorizes the five facilities.
It’s an entirely different process, provided in law, to
actually do the selection of the slots sites. A commission will
be appointed to oversee the slots program, the commission will
accept bids from potential licensees, and that process will unfold?–?assuming,
of course, the referendum passes.
Do you expect it to pass by a wide margin?
I’m not good at predicting. As Yogi Berra said, “Prediction
is very hard, especially about the future.” But I’m
confident that after we get our message out, a majority of residents
will support the referendum.
This is an issue that’s been in the public for some time.
Unlike, let’s say, an election, where the candidates get
nominated and shortly thereafter there’s an election, and
there may be a lot of undecided voters, given that they’re
just learning about the candidates, this issue has been discussed
for a number of years. It’s been in the media for a number
of years, and I think most people have made up their mind. I
don’t think there’s a lot of undecided people out
there.
But you are still educating people. You obviously believe there’s
still an opportunity to reach voters.
Not everyone has decided. But what’s important for those
few people who have not decided is that they understand the alternatives.
That they realize this is not just some abstract concept?–?but
an issue that, for better or worse, will have a real and measurable
impact on just about everyone in this state.
It’s a compelling case.