Let’s have a vote on gambling

Should the people of Sullivan County have an opportunity to vote on the question of casino gaming? You would think so.

As early as 1996, a Task Force appointed by Governor Pataki made recommendations which included non-binding local referendums in communities where Indian casinos would locate. The state would require it if the New York Constitution were amended. Even if two successive sessions of the state legislature approved an amendment, a referendum vote would have been required.

In 1997, Leni Binder, who now chairs the county legislature, said, “We’ll have a local referendum. I don’t think we’re looking for the streets to be paved with gold. Our eyes are wide open.”

Both Assemblyman Jacob Gunther and state Senator John Bonacic have spoken in favor of a local referendum.

But when Governor Pataki signed legislation in 2001 authorizing casinos here, no local referendum language was included.

What happened to the referendum?

If it’s a good idea for the state, why isn’t it a good idea for Sullivan County?

We got some interesting responses from the legislators when posing the question last week.

One legislator questioned the validity of a referendum, since only 30 or 40 percent of the eligible electorate generally go to the polls to vote.

But that’s the same 30 or 40 percent who elected the legislature, isn’t it?

Another suggested that the Town of Thompson, where three of the possible sites are located, should have a referendum.

Fine. But if it’s only Thompson’s business, then why is the county negotiating host community agreements? The county’s doing it because the entire county will be impacted and for that same reason the people of the county have a right to vote on it.

It’s too late now, another said.

“The horse is out of the barn,” and another agreed saying, “It would have been a good idea a year ago. You should have asked me the question then.”

As a matter of fact, we did ask the question almost two years ago in April 2001. Legislator Chris Cunningham then had written to the Governor asking that a referendum be a part of any approval legislation that he signed.

I suggested editorially that “if we are going to have gambling, I’d like a shot at deciding the issue in the voting booth before the fact. Folks in Sullivan County should have say in an issue that has the potential to change the county’s landscape permanently.

Maybe it will pass in a landslide. Then again, maybe it won’t.”

And that seems to be the real problem. People have been selling others on the eventuality of gambling in Sullivan County for years and a lot of money has already been invested. What in the world would we do if a referendum failed?

But there is some evidence to believe it would pass. When that out-of-county daily, which the legislature loves to hate, polled people in 1996, some 61 percent of the respondents were in favor of gambling in Sullivan County.

The legislators themselves are uncertain. Polling them informally about their districts’ likely voting outcomes, three said it would pass, two said it would fail, one thought it would be a toss-up, two said it would depend on how the question was worded, and one wouldn’t guess.

County officials say they can’t ask for a yes or no vote on gambling, since it’s the state’s decision. Maybe not, but they sure can ask for an opinion. Whether the vote is binding or non-binding, there will no longer be doubt about what people think. This is an election year for the county legislature, when people will be asked to focus on county issues. What county issue is more important?

In the final analysis, whether the question passes or fails may not be as important as allowing people a chance to have their voices heard.

David Hulse, News Editor