Urging residents to vote yes on Question 1 Nov. 4

Editor:

    It has been five years since we had an opportunity to first vote on a racino for Scarborough Downs. At that time I was decidedly against the proposal and was happy to see it go down in defeat. However, things have changed for me and the town during the ensuing years and I find myself compelled to write now in favor of the Scarborough Village proposal. I understand that it is a very emotional issue for both sides of the argument and, as a result, rationality is being lost. I do believe if you carefully weigh the arguments being made it is clear that the overall benefit to Scarborough will be positive.

    Opponents of the development claim that it is not economic development. Of all the arguments made this one puzzles me the most. If it isn’t economic development then what is it? I believe it isn’t the type of economic development they would like. Sure, it would be great if manufacturers were lining up to set up clean, green factories in Scarborough but the truth is they aren’t and they won’t. Manufacturing in the U.S. and Maine especially has been on the decline for years and there is nothing to indicate this trend is going to change. And Maine isn’t likely to see other industries such as insurance and financial companies rush to get in. It is true there are pockets of unique industries in the town and state, the company I work for being one.  Most of these businesses are entrepreneurial in nature and only offer modest economic impact for the towns in which they are located. None of them would yield the potential magnitude of growth offered by the Scarborough Village proposal. The truth of the matter is that Maine is primarily a tourist destination and anything that will expand that base and bring more tourist dollars to Scarborough is good for Scarborough.

    Another puzzling argument for me is that Penn National Gaming is a large, evil (by some arguments), out of state corporation that will send all of the money earned out of state. This simply is not true. Both Scarborough and Maine would regulate the racino heavily and both would gain significant tax revenue.  This tax revenue would help to fund the multitude of projects the town and state must do. Our roads and schools are crumbling and nobody wants to raise taxes to fix the problems. We must look to other sources of revenue. The opponents like to paint Penn National as a huge, greedy corporation. Well, Penn is a large corporation who, like all companies in a capitalistic society, are in the business of making money. So are Bank of America, IBM, and Hewlett-Packard. If one of those companies was looking to set up shop in Scarborough you would never hear that they were going to send all the profits out of state. If we are to open a racino, Penn is exactly the type of company we would want involved. They know the industry and would work hard to make it a success.

   A troubling argument I have heard against the development is that, with the decline in harness racing, we should just let Scarborough Downs die. This saddens me. What were people saying when the shoe and textile industries were dying? No one wanted to see those jobs leave and many families were affected.  If we had an opportunity to keep those industries and actually expand them wouldn’t we have done it? Scarborough Downs is in that exact situation. Failure to find ways to expand their income will mean the loss of jobs in a multitude of support industries such as food service and farming.  By adding a racino they can secure the existing jobs and offer new opportunities to others.  This model has worked successfully for race tracks all over the United States and it will work here.

  What about the proximity of the track to the schools?  Well, I think others have made it clear that gambling exists right in the backyard of our schools in the form of lottery sales at the nearby convenience stores.  While I rarely play the lottery, I certainly can’t miss the racks of colorful tickets over the counter when I buy a gallon of milk at Cumberland Farms.  Kids are far more likely to be passing through there or the Exxon station or the Mobil station than Scarborough Downs.

  What about crime? Any major economic development that brings more people into an area will likely bring an increase in crime with it. Does that mean you don’t do the development? I don’t think so; instead you prepare for it. I believe that many of the opponents to the project are subliminally referring to an increase in organized crime. The facts just don’t bear this out. Look at successful models such as Saratoga Springs in New York or Dover Downs in Delaware.  These tracks enhance the communities in which they are located.

  On Nov. 4 we must decide this issue rationally.  When you carefully consider how this project can benefit Scarborough for the long term I think you may change your mind as I have. Please join me in voting yes on local municipal Question 1.

Peter Vachon

Scarborough

Gambling revenue  will benefit town

Editor:

   Scarborough residents: Have you purchased a lottery ticket? Does your child play hockey? Do you enjoy the Lion’s Club dinners? Do you appreciate the fine work of Project G.R.A.C.E.? Have you noticed that those Texas Hold’em’s are the best way to generate much needed revenue for a group or organization? This is gambling revenue working to benefit many fine organizations– in one way or the other. If people didn’t like to gamble, we wouldn’t be talking – would we?

 So really, who has more business being in the gambling business? The State of Maine – with the Maine State Lottery introduced in 1974? Or Maine’s 150-year-old harness racing industry who introduced the first form of legal gambling? Let Maine’s harness racing industry grow and compete!

 The Downs and the town of Scarborough have hosted gambling longer than any other town around here. They are a part of our community. They support the local community; Giving in many ways. Allowing them to add slot machines will mean that we will finally have a way to afford a  community center and new schools without having our taxes go up. And, the project will also bring more business and jobs. This will not take away from the many fine organizations that benefit from gambling money: Scarborough Downs gives generously to these organizations, and has throughout their 58 year history of doing business in this town.

They have a proven track record and they also have a lot more to give the community. We all will benefit. Vote yes on local referendum #1.

Evelyn Tarbell

Scarborough

Give Scarborough Downs project time to mature

Editor:

  I’d like to add my voice to those that are in support of the Scarborough Village Project. I am not a gambler. I don’t play the lottery. I don’t go out of state to the casinos. I don’t go to Bangor to play the slots. I don’t use the illegal slot machines that are all over Maine. And, I don’t bet on the races at Scarborough Downs, which has been going on right here for more than 50 years. The video slot machines as proposed by the Downs appear to be a very small part of a project that can enhance Scarborough’s future as a town with lower taxes and great schools. 

 Our schools need repairs and replacements and from where I sit I do not think the mood in Scarborough will support higher taxes for schools, a new public safety building, or any other building for that matter. There is a fine point not to be missed in this debate. “Gaming taxes” or taxes collected of the income from betting do not affect the school state aid formula and therefore drop right to the bottom line of the Scarborough town budget. If the new gaming facility at Scarborough Village only does $125 million in annual revenue the town’s share would be $6 million.  This is in addition to any real estate taxes generated by the entire project, estimated at about $2 million. Remember the town’s budget is roughly $50 million. 

 Here is the only hard choice in the matter: Should we freeze property taxes for several years, reduce property taxes by more than 10 percent, or replace all of the schools that need to be replaced. 

 I visited Foxwoods once. I did not gamble one penny but I ate in the restaurants and purchased items in the gift shops. I have been to Las Vegas and Atlantic City for conferences. I spent money on hotels, food, and shopping.  I am not a gambler. Voting yes is just the beginning step in a very long process. In the end I may not favor the project, but I am cautious about cutting off the process before it really begins. Let us give the project time to mature.

Annalee Rosenblatt

Scarborough

Perplexed about the situation

Editor:

 This is in response to Karen Vachon’s letter  in the Oct. 3 edition of the Leader. She addresses many points that are salient regarding whether or not it is a “good idea” to invite Penn National to join with Scarborough Downs and offer our community a racino. However, I am going to only address one of her last points because I too am perplexed.   

Vachon refers to gambling in our state as already present and “…it is consumer response that drives an industry (otherwise know as demand).”  Therefore, if there is a consumer demand for something, business has a right to respond to it. Following that line of thinking, there is demand here in Scarborough for underage sale of cigarettes.  Ask any teenager in Scarborough High School (I have). It is already present here in our state and has had a long history (since at least the mid-1800s).  

 Because there is a demand for cigarettes, my friend from Massachusetts wants to meet that demand. It would require no infrastructure output from the town or state, no changes to the zoning, no parking issues, and he would be happy to donate a percentage of his profits to the Scarborough schools so that they could offer more art classes to the students kindergarten through grade 12.

 Yikes. I too am perplexed.

 Abi Ordway

Scarborough 

We don’t want ‘adult uses’ after racino

Editor:

  A town council member said in a recent e-mail to a concerned parent, “I wouldn’t lose any sleep over this issue” regarding the potential for strip joints being introduced into Scarborough due to the slots.

   Well, first of all, the issue has come up in the past and a moratorium was put in place to work out a solution in 2002. It was recognized that the town’s lack of an ordinance exposed (excuse the expression) it to allowing a strip joint so a well crafted ordinance was established that met the need for providing a limited appropriate location while meeting the state and federal anti-discrimination / free speech laws. That ordinance has held up well for the last seven years.

   Now comes Penn National with a plan for a Racino in the “Center of Town.”  They use Saratoga Springs as the benchmark so of course, I started my exhaustive study of that town. Come to find out, they are being challenged with a business that wants to have a strip club even though they have had an ordinance that has stood the test of time and kept them out of town, just like ours.

   What they determined is that they are “exposed” too. But for a new reason; the town has changed much in the last 10 years since the racino, and the racino has created an “Adult Uses Area.”  The town looks at numerous locations but determines that the “best” site is….the Adult Uses area. Yes, the property near the racino. In the planning board meetings there are many concerned homeowners and parents hoping to make an argument to keep more disruption, insecurity and lost quality of life out of their neighborhood but it is pointed out that this is the most logical location. After all, they say, we already have adult uses there. The good news for them, if you want to call it that, is that the casino is not “The Center of Town.”  Our racino is the center of town, already being nicknamed “Downstown,” not the quaint name I was hoping for.

   Now, I have been accused of using fear tactics on this issue. Why? I’m not sure because it appears rather self-evident that there is a link between adult uses and say, adult uses, if you get the point, but here is my logic for any and all to challenge.

 Q. Why are Adult Uses an allowed use?

 A. Adult Uses are legal businesses in Maine and must be allowed under state and federal anti-discrimination/free speech laws.

 Q. Our ordinances seem pretty restrictive; we don’t have strip joints now, so why should I care?

 A. It was written to be restrictive because we had no similar uses or appropriate locations established that would require fair treatment.  We still had to allow them but nothing says we can’t tightly regulate where they go.

 Q. Where can Adult Uses go and what is an appropriate location?

 A. An appropriate place would be in a similar zone to another Adult Use but with reasonable distance standards.  This potentially expands the area as opposed to narrowing it.  Another Adult Use, at least in NY, has been established to be the Saratoga Springs Racino (not finalized as I write this but was the choice of the board).  Now, understand that the Race Track in Saratoga didn’t meet the standard of “Adult Use Only” just as The Downs doesn’t trip our regulations as long as there is no Racino. Throw in the racino to the equation and it strips our ordinance (there I go again).

 Q. Might we end up having strip clubs in our town?

 A.   Saratoga Springs will be allowing these strip joints in their town and likely near the track.  They don’t appear to believe they have much of a choice.  Now remember, they can be well paying jobs!  It isn’t exactly high tech. but it also isn’t laundry service or vacuuming at the new racino or its hotel so it probably pays better than that.

   My opinion is that at the very least, we will be in a lawsuit relatively soon after the slots are here and we will have little choice but to allow these joints in picturesque Scarborough. But, according to at least one councilor, “I wouldn’t lose any sleep over this issue.”

   I hope our councilors do lose sleep over it until they can answer that question without the specter of a lawsuit.  I believe we would lose.  Just another reason to vote no, because nothing is ever free.  We all really know it, we just want to believe otherwise.  Some call this using fear tactics.  I call it thinking.

Mark Maroon

Scarborough

Slots will not help town economy

Editor:

   The notion that Scarborough Village Slots will help the economy of this town is a fallacy. I will admit that I almost fell for lies that Penn National is promising us: monies for a new school, a community center and lowering our taxes. Then I decided to do some research. When I googled the phrase “casino and economic effect” I came up with study after study showing that there are no long-term economic benefits of having a casino in ones backyard. Of particular interest were the reports compiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston: (www.bos.frb.org/economic/neppc/memos/2006/brome091906.pdf), the Federal Reserve Bank of Saint Louis: (www.stlouisfed.org/news/releases/2003/01_02_03.html) and the information shared by People Against a Casino Town (www.pactoregon.org). In the end, most of the towns that allowed the casinos came to regret their decision after it was too late. We’re privileged that the choice is still ours; let’s learn from the mistakes of others, recognize the negative impact that the racino will have on our town, and ultimately vote against it.

Jennifer Labonte

Scarborough

Don’t buy into proposed ‘fantasy’

Editor:

 If there is one thing that has been made certain by the ongoing crisis in the financial and credit markets, it’s that any existing development or revenue projections made as part of the “Town Village Center” proposal are a complete fantasy.

 Economists are projecting a long and painful economic downturn. How attractive is gambling going to be as an entertainment option to someone who is worried about heating their homes, putting food on the table or keeping their jobs – a situation far too common right now.

 Penn Gaming and Gene Beaudoin will tell you that gambling is recession-proof. Don’t believe it. According to the Oct. 9 edition of the Hartford Courant, Foxwoods just announced the layoff of 700 workers. And last weekend Mohegan Sun abruptly halted construction of its partially completed expansion. Slot machine revenues are down at both casinos.

 With empty store fronts in the Cabela’s development and a huge inventory of vacant or grossly underutilized commercial property along Route One and Haigis Parkway, we need to ask ourselves how, with a wrecked credit market and much more desirable property available, is Scarborough Village Partners going to raise the massive amounts of capital needed to make their promises a reality?

 What does all of this mean? If voters do end up approving the so-called “Town Village Center”, there will be scant tax revenues. Farms will not be saved. And there will be no investment in anything but slot machines at Scarborough Downs for a long, long, time – if ever. Don’t buy into the fantasy being sold to us by Scarborough Village Partners. The stakes are too high.

David Nitchman

Scarborough

Flaherty opposes racino in town

Editor: 

 As I campaign door to door in our town, I hear many concerns ranging from energy costs to potholes. But one issue continues to be brought up on porches and sidewalks across our town: a racino in Scarborough. 

Most people I speak with have no issue with Scarborough Downs.  Harness racing has been an important part of Maine’s history as an agricultural state and Scarborough Downs has been a fixture of our community.  But what is worrying people is the inclusion of video gambling in the form of slot machines here in our own town. I share their concerns for a number of reasons. 

One concern I have is the proximity to our schools; Wentworth, the middle school and the high school are all within blocks of Scarborough Downs. With gambling comes consumption of alcohol, which impairs drivers.  Our community uses facilities at our schools throughout the evenings for sports, clubs, and more. 

Another concern I have is the type of economic growth we are supporting in town. I am always pleased to see more businesses in town, but I am fearful when very few good paying jobs come with the development. We need to be supporting growth that will be dependent on consumers, not gamblers.  

If the referendum does pass, it still must be approved by both the Legislature and the governor. I will continue to oppose the plan in the Legislature to prevent slots from coming to our town. More importantly, I will be a leader on the issues important to our town and not take a back seat on the tough ones.

Sean Flaherty

Scarborough

Don’t ‘gamble’ with the future

Editor:

  On Nov. 4, the citizens of Scarborough must declare their positions concerning Scarborough Downs proposal to amend the zoning regulations to allow for slot machines. As a resident of Scarborough and a small business person, I stand firmly opposed to this proposal for several reasons.

   Scarborough is a family friendly community. It provides a safe, welcoming environment in which to raise a family and operate a business. In my opinion, the addition of a racino operation and the associated publicity would cloud the town’s current status and result in a new perception of Scarborough as an East Coast gambling destination. This new identification may diminish the town’s attractiveness both to young families and to businesses valuing family-oriented lifestyles.

   While there may be some economic development benefits from a racino, Scarborough with the assistance of SEDCO, has been doing a great job of acquiring new businesses such as Cabelas, Fairchild Semiconductor, Lowes, Prime Motors, and others. Partly due to this success, our tax rate is the lowest among similar area communities. While the Scarborough Downs property is undeveloped, it would seem to me that through the natural course of time that this property will be developed thoughtfully and that we do not need to jeopardize our town’s future with a racino. Additionally, national statistics concerning the impact of new gambling facilities on existing local businesses are mixed, suggesting that some businesses may be impacted negatively. This factor in itself would raise a cautionary flag as to the wisdom of developing a racino.

 Finally, I am concerned about the potential for an increase in crime. While the crime statistics from the recently opened Hollywood Slots do not seem alarming, Earl Grinols from the University of Illinois, a noted researcher on gambling related crime nationally, suggests that crime has a lag period of 5 to 7 years. His findings suggest that a rather significant increase in crime, including robberies, larceny, burglary, aggravated assault, and auto theft is experienced within that period in communities developing gambling facilities. While the specific numbers could be debated, to me the trend is impressive and problematic.

 I realize that this is a contentious and somewhat ambiguous issue on which neighbors may not agree. I believe, however, that the risk factors inherent in a racino operation far outweigh the potential economic benefits and that the town would be well served not to “gamble” with its future.

Jim Elkins

Scarborough