State Board for Community Colleges and Occupational Education September 10, 2014 TOPIC: Amendment 68 Ballot Question on Gaming Expansion in Arapahoe, Mesa, and Pueblo counties PRESENTED BY: Rhonda Bentz, Director of Media and Government Relations ISSUE: On the November 4 th ballot a question is before voters on whether to expand limited-stakes casino gambling at horse racetracks in Arapahoe, Mesa, and Pueblo counties. The expansion would allow slot machines, blackjack, poker, and the games of roulette and craps in one racetrack in each county. Within 30 days of operating casino gambling, each horse racetrack must pay a $25 million, one-time fee to the state. New gambling tax revenue and the $25 million one-time fee would be deposited in the newly created K-12 Education Fund and distributed on a per-pupil basis to public school districts and to a state agency that authorizes public charter schools. Funding from the new gaming tax revenue must be used to address local education issues and may not replace existing funding for the public schools. It is estimated by the state that a new casino at Arapahoe Park racetrack could provide up to $114.5 million each year beginning in budget year 2016-17, or about $133 per student. Because Mesa and Pueblo counties do not currently have operational horse racetracks, casino gambling in those counties could not begin until 2019. Proponents of the amendment cite the need to better fund Colorado s K-12 system, new construction jobs in the communities, potential long term job creation to staff the extra games at the racetracks, and the potential for more money being spent in the communities boosting tax revenue. Opponents cite the lack of local control, the expense associated with the expansion in their communities, and the negative impact it would have on the gaming operations in the towns of Black Hawk, Cripple Creek and Central City. The Colorado Community College System received $ 28.25 million from over the past years from gaming activity in the existing gaming towns. The vast majority of these funds would likely be eliminated if 1
Amendment 68 is passed as gaming activity would likely migrate from the mountain towns to the metro area. A copy of the 3 rd /final draft of Amendment 68, and materials from both the proponents and opponents follow. ATTACHMENTS: 3 rd / Final Draft of Amendment 68 from the Colorado Legislative Council Materials from Coloradans for Better Schools Materials from No on 68 2
ATTACHMENT: 3rd/Final Draft, Amendment 68 3
ATTACHMENT: 3rd/Final Draft, Amendment 68 4
ATTACHMENT: 3rd/Final Draft, Amendment 68 5
ATTACHMENT: 3rd/Final Draft, Amendment 68 6
ATTACHMENT: 3rd/Final Draft, Amendment 68 7
ATTACHMENT: Yes on 68 Fact Sheet YES on 68 KEY FACTS ABOUT AMENDMENT 68 Coloradans for Better Schools Millions of dollars in new funds for Colorado schools without costing taxpayers one penny Amendment 68 is a citizens ballot initiative that will appear on the November 2014 statewide ballot. It will provide more than $114 million for Colorado K-12 schools each year by permitting expanded gaming at Arapahoe Park horse racetrack. The new funds will be provided as additional money for Colorado s K-12 public and charter schools and will be generated without raising taxes for Colorado citizens or cutting services from other public programs. Our children s chances for success threatened by deep funding cuts to education Over the past several years, Colorado public and charter schools have endured more than $1 billion in funding cuts. Schools have done their best to provide students with a high quality education while coping with inadequate resources, aging facilities and dated learning materials. Despite their best efforts, the children of our state are simply not getting the education and preparation they need and deserve. While numerous attempts have and continue to be made to restore funding to K-12 schools, the chronic problem of underfunding remains. Colorado ranks near the bottom among all U.S. states in public perpupil funding for education. We owe it to our children to better prepare them and in turn, our state for future success. Expanded gaming at Arapahoe Park to provide $114 million a year to new K-12 Education Fund Under Amendment 68, more than $114 million will be generated each year for Colorado K-12 schools simply by expanding gaming at Arapahoe Park horse racetrack. That amount is roughly equal to the annual sum of all payments made by Colorado s 35- plus existing casinos. Additionally, Arapahoe Park horse racetrack will pay an initial one-time fee of $25 million directly to the newly established K-12 Education Fund to ensure schools begin receiving benefits as soon as possible. Arapahoe Park will also work together with local government to establish an annual fee, paid by the track, to offset costs for public services related to gaming. [continued] Paid for by Coloradans for Better Schools, Inc. 8
ATTACHMENT: Yes on 68 Fact Sheet Vitally needed new revenue stream to improve K-12 schools Amendment 68 also allows expanded gaming at two future horse racetracks one each in Mesa and Pueblo Counties once they meet certain qualifying criteria. This would add substantial annual revenue to the K-12 Education Fund. The new funds will be distributed to public school districts and the Colorado Charter School Institute on a per-pupil basis to fund education improvement programs such as: Reducing class sizes Acquiring new technology like computers and tablets for students and teachers Enhancing school safety and security Improving school buildings and facilities New Technology Arts The money that will be generated is dedicated solely to improving K-12 schools and will be protected from being used for any other purpose under the newly established K-12 Education Fund. Specific guidelines and strict regulatory oversight Under Amendment 68, expanded gaming is permitted at no more than one Class B horse racetrack in each of three Colorado counties Arapahoe, Mesa and Pueblo - that have a history of hosting wagering. Using these strict qualifying criteria, the measure ensures that gaming does not expand beyond where it already exists. The racetracks will be strictly regulated and subject to oversight by the Colorado Limited Gaming Control Commission the same state organization that oversees existing limited gaming in Colorado. In addition, the K-12 Education Fund will undergo annual financial audits conducted by the State Auditor. Increased Safety & Security Smaller Class Sizes Improved Facilities Extra Curricular Activities The needs of individual schools differ widely, and this new program will give each district the flexibility to use the new funds to meet local needs. Local economies and workers will greatly benefit In addition to Colorado s K-12 schools, workers and the state s economy will also greatly benefit from the creation of hundreds of new construction jobs initially, and hundreds more permanent jobs. Racetrack visitation will drive more customers to local businesses and provide a boost for the economy. Wages from newly created jobs will also go to purchasing more goods and services in the community. When it comes time to vote, remember... Amendment 68 is a BETTER WAY for BETTER SCHOOLS. YES on 68 Coloradans for Better Schools For more information, please visit us online at: VoteYESon68.com Twitter.com/VoteYESon68 Facebook.com/VoteYESon68 9
ATTACHMENT: No on 68 Fact Sheet This November we will see Amendment 68 on the statewide ballot. Amendment 68 a repeat of a 2003 ballot measure to bring casino gambling to the 400-acre Arapahoe Park horseracing facility directly across from the City of Aurora, right off of Quincy Road. Rejected in 2003 by 81% of the voters, it remains a troublesome proposal here in 2014. This proposal creates a number of terrible precedents for the City of Aurora, Arapahoe County and the 178 school districts across Colorado, along with programs that depend on gaming tax revenue from the mountain casinos for funding. Despite the Amendment being in support of K-12 funding, not one school district has endorsed the measure and not one was consulted before they started circulating petitions to get it on the ballot. In 2008, Colorado voters overwhelmingly supported Amendment 50 which expanded gaming with increased revenue going to Community Colleges. This $6 million a year goes directly to Colorado Community Colleges creating jobs and economic development in communities across Colorado. Unfortunately, the proponents of Amendment 68 did not protect community colleges, or any other program currently receiving gaming revenues, when they decided to send all of the tax revenues from the Amendment 68 casino to K-12 schools. The $100 million being promised to K-12 is not new money, but funds previously directed to other programs, including community colleges. There is no evidence that Arapahoe County or the City of Aurora want to host a Las Vegas-style casino. In fact, early indications are that both communities strongly oppose Amendment 68, but that statewide voters could force them to host the casino, whether they want it or not. Facts: Since 1992, the Colorado Constitution has ensured local communities that they don t have to accept a casino they don t want. Passed by voters with a 76% margin, the local control amendment stipulates in the constitution that statewide voters cannot force casinos into a community without express voter approval by that community. Without explanation, the authors of Amendment 68 exempted their casino from that provision, meaning the City of Aurora, along with Arapahoe, Pueblo and Mesa Counties could be forced to take casinos they don t want. Colorado s current gaming industry supports a number of important programs, organizations and initiatives including community colleges, travel and tourism promotion, bioscience research, higher education research and historic preservation, in addition to contributing to the state s General Fund. To date, every county in Colorado has benefited from gaming tax revenues. The industry has contributed more than $1.4 billion in gaming tax revenues, added an additional $20.3 million a year to the coffers of state and local governments through taxes and fees and directly or indirectly generated nearly 30,000 jobs. 10
ATTACHMENT: No on 68 Fact Sheet Voters are being asked to lock into the constitution the approval of one or more casinos at the 400-acre racetrack site before we know any details as to how the site would be developed, how much public cost will be involved in developing the site and whether the casino or local taxpayers, or both, will being paying those costs. For 24 years, the Colorado Constitution has required that casinos pay 10% of their tax proceeds to host cities, and 12% to host counties, to off-set the costs and impacts that casino gambling bring to a community, so it is troubling that Amendment 68 would even leave this an open question in their proposal. In exempting themselves from this provision too, Amendment 68 leaves this important detail to be negotiated after the election, after the measure is cemented into the Colorado constitution, to the advantage of the casinos at the expense of the local taxpayers in Arapahoe and Aurora. Cherry Creek School District, which has plans to build their next high school immediately across the street from what would now become a 24-7 Las Vegas-style casino, is also in a pickle, since the authors of Amendment 68 didn t take into consideration how a full-scale casino and a high school co-exist across the street from one another. For obvious reasons, the two don t seem to go together and leaving that loose end to be worked out after the election is worrisome. The proponents of Amendment 68 did not consult the Cherry Creek School District before putting the measure on the ballot. The Rhode Island company that owns the Arapahoe Park racetrack appears to be positioning their campaign as a turf battle over between themselves and the mountain casinos. They are wrong. They are taking a sleepy horse-track that runs one-and-a-half months out of the year and converting it into a 24-7 Las Vegas-style casino, which is not anything Aurora or Arapahoe County residents ever envisioned or requested A critical question that won t be resolved until after the election is whether the racetrack site, the Rhode Island ownership group, or both would be receiving constitutional protection for a casino license. The site is 400-acres, leaving open the possibility that the ownership group could sub-divide the racetrack parcel into a Las Vegas Strip of multiple casinos, all having an investment share in the same racetrack. The ballot language addresses a minimum number of machines and games the casino may be authorized to operate not a maximum which would work well for a multi-casino conclave outside of Aurora. Last, voters are being told that the central premise of Amendment 68 is allowing casino gambling at licensed horse-racing tracks, which only exists in one place in Colorado; across the street from Aurora, in Arapahoe County. The two other communities, Mesa and Pueblo County, would have to build a commercial horse-track (an upfront investment Pueblo believes would cost $35 million) and successfully operate it for five years before they would have any chance at a casino license. The likelihood that racetracks in Pueblo and Mesa Counties could meet this criteria are slim. Across the country most, but not all, racetracks are closing once they receive their casino license. Nowhere across the country is anyone even building a new horse-track. Nowhere. Here s another important detail about Amendment 68 that voters might miss: Once the casino license is granted to Arapahoe Park they can stop horse-racing, close the track and redevelop that footprint. It raises an 11
ATTACHMENT: No on 68 Fact Sheet important question as to whether the racetrack is solely a gimmick to justify the casinos or whether there is a legitimate commitment between the owners of Arapahoe Park and the horseracing community. Voters, local governments and horseracing fans shouldn t be duped into thinking Amendment 68 will help horseracing in Colorado, when Amendment 68 allows the owners of Arapahoe Park to tear down the track, leaving nothing but a proliferation of Las Vegas-style casinos on a 400-acre parcel in the Denver metro-area. The responsible thing for Amendment 68 s sponsors to do is to withdraw thie measure, fix it, and clarify that if horseracing goes away, so does the casino. They re either permanently linked together, or they re not. 12
ATTACHMENT: Durango Herald Article, No on 68 Amendment 68 The Durango Herald Promise of increased school funding excuse to benefit on out-of-state company Article Last Updated: Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:16pm Many questions of public policy deserve serious thought and careful consideration of all sides of the issue. Others, not so much. An example of the latter is Amendment 68. It is a transparent attempt to use Colorado s initiative process to benefit a single, out-of-state company, almost certainly at the expense of existing Colorado businesses and jobs. Amendment 68 would allow casino gambling at the Arapahoe Park horse-racing track near Aurora. It would also allow gambling at as-yet nonexistent tracks in Pueblo and Mesa counties but only after they had been in operation, with wagering, for five continuous years. Now, the only racetrack in the state, Arapahoe Park is owned by Mile High Racing and Entertainment, which is, in turn, owned by Twin River Worldwide Holding Inc. That company also owns Twin River Casino in Lincoln, Rhode Island, which is threatened by Massachusetts officials decision to allow a slots parlor and three casinos. Lincoln is minutes from the Massachusetts state line and, according to Google Maps, less than an hour and a half from Boston. The company s motivation is clear and, to a point, understandable. Its effort would be more sympathetic, however, if solving its Rhode Island problem would not come at Colorado s expense. The selling point is that Arapahoe Park s backers wrote into Amendment 68 a provision for a 34 percent tax on gambling revenue, to be devoted entirely to education. Supporters claim it would yield $100 million per year in funding for K-12 and charter schools. 13
ATTACHMENT: Durango Herald Article, No on 68 Opposition to the Arapahoe Park casino scheme comes largely from the owners of existing Colorado casinos in the mountain towns of Cripple Creek, Blackhawk and Central City. They fear Denver-area gamblers would rather make the short drive to unincorporated Arapahoe County than the longer one to their casinos. They are probably right. Arapahoe Park would be the only casino actually in the Denver metro area, and it would be large. In addition to 65 gaming tables, Amendment 68 specifies Arapahoe Park would have at least 2,500 slot machines. The biggest casino now operating in Colorado, in Blackhawk, has fewer than 1,500. The worry is that while Arapahoe Park might offer new jobs, they would, to one degree or another, come at the expense of jobs at existing casinos. Hiring one Coloradan while eliminating another s job is not a move forward. Likewise, the money for education is unlikely to appear out of thin air. Much of it will be money that would already be collected by other casinos. Cripple Creek gets more than 80 percent of its revenue from casinos. El Paso County has received 147 historic preservation grants totalling an estimated $10 million worth of casino money. If that money shifts to Arapahoe Park, it will largely go from one state pocket to another. Gambling is not magic. It is a business with a finite market. The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday the Revel Casino Hotel in Atlantic City is closing and laying off more than 3,000 people. That comes after one major hotel and casino closed earlier this year. Two more already announced they are shutting down. Thanks to competition from casinos in neighboring states, gambling revenue in Atlantic City is down more than 40 percent from its 2006 peak. New money for education would be great, but there is no reason to think Amendment 68 would actually provide that. (No teacher or education organizations are behind it.) What it would do is put existing jobs at risk, threaten historic towns and clutter up Colorado s Constitution for no other reason than to boost an East Coast company. We do not need it. 14