2.06.08
Voters back gambling measures
By Nancy Vogel, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
SACRAMENTO -- Measures to uphold an expansion of gambling at Indian casinos were headed for victory with about 90% of the state's precincts counted this morning, while an initiative to adjust the Legislature's term limits was behind. Roughly 56% of voters favored Indian gaming propositions 94, 95, 96 and 97. About 53% of voters opposed the term limits measure.
Another measure, Proposition 92, to guarantee community college funding, was rejected by about 58% of voters. As expected, voters also appeared to be rejecting a transportation funding measure, Proposition 91, that had been abandoned by its authors months ago.
A strong lead opened early for the gambling measures, which would give state taxpayers a share of slot machine revenues.
"Right now it looks like the voters are saying yes to hundreds of millions of new dollars each year," Roger Salazar, spokesman for the Yes on Propositions 94, 95, 96 and 97 campaign, said Tuesday. "We hope when the final tally comes in that will still be the case."
Scott Macdonald, spokesman for the campaign that opposed the casino measures, acknowledged late Tuesday that the returns so far "don't look good."
The battle was hard-fought, Macdonald said, even though opponents of the gambling propositions were outspent 4 to 1, because "people have serious reservations about what's in these compacts."
The gambling propositions asked voters to uphold or nullify four agreements negotiated by the governor and approved by the Legislature.
The pacts were forged to allow four Riverside and San Diego county tribes to add 17,000 slot machines to the 8,000 they already operate. In return, the tribes would pay the state a combined minimum of $123 million a year and up to 25% of the revenue from the new machines.
Advertisements for and against the measures have dominated airwaves for weeks. The campaign came within a few million dollars of breaking a record. Both sides raised a total of $147 million, just shy of the $152 million campaign over a 2006 oil tax initiative.
The four tribes with agreements at stake -- the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians and Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation -- said the deals could be worth $9 billion to the state over the next 22 years.
Opponents called that a rosy assumption and argued that the agreements would further enrich four tribes without increasing payments to tribes without gambling operations or with small casinos.
The four referenda were financed by Terrence Fancher, who manages companies that own California horse racetracks and have a stake in a Las Vegas casino; the casino workers union Unite-HERE, which dislikes labor provisions in the compacts; and two tribes that struck different gambling agreements and different revenue-sharing arrangements with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2004...
SACRAMENTO -- Measures to uphold an expansion of gambling at Indian casinos were headed for victory with about 90% of the state's precincts counted this morning, while an initiative to adjust the Legislature's term limits was behind. Roughly 56% of voters favored Indian gaming propositions 94, 95, 96 and 97. About 53% of voters opposed the term limits measure.
Another measure, Proposition 92, to guarantee community college funding, was rejected by about 58% of voters. As expected, voters also appeared to be rejecting a transportation funding measure, Proposition 91, that had been abandoned by its authors months ago.
A strong lead opened early for the gambling measures, which would give state taxpayers a share of slot machine revenues.
"Right now it looks like the voters are saying yes to hundreds of millions of new dollars each year," Roger Salazar, spokesman for the Yes on Propositions 94, 95, 96 and 97 campaign, said Tuesday. "We hope when the final tally comes in that will still be the case."
Scott Macdonald, spokesman for the campaign that opposed the casino measures, acknowledged late Tuesday that the returns so far "don't look good."
The battle was hard-fought, Macdonald said, even though opponents of the gambling propositions were outspent 4 to 1, because "people have serious reservations about what's in these compacts."
The gambling propositions asked voters to uphold or nullify four agreements negotiated by the governor and approved by the Legislature.
The pacts were forged to allow four Riverside and San Diego county tribes to add 17,000 slot machines to the 8,000 they already operate. In return, the tribes would pay the state a combined minimum of $123 million a year and up to 25% of the revenue from the new machines.
Advertisements for and against the measures have dominated airwaves for weeks. The campaign came within a few million dollars of breaking a record. Both sides raised a total of $147 million, just shy of the $152 million campaign over a 2006 oil tax initiative.
The four tribes with agreements at stake -- the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians and Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation -- said the deals could be worth $9 billion to the state over the next 22 years.
Opponents called that a rosy assumption and argued that the agreements would further enrich four tribes without increasing payments to tribes without gambling operations or with small casinos.
The four referenda were financed by Terrence Fancher, who manages companies that own California horse racetracks and have a stake in a Las Vegas casino; the casino workers union Unite-HERE, which dislikes labor provisions in the compacts; and two tribes that struck different gambling agreements and different revenue-sharing arrangements with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2004...
No comments:
Post a Comment