Concluding that “ownership and operation are flexible concepts,” the Kansas Supreme Court today gave the green light to the 2007 expanded gambling law and the four destination casinos planned around the state. That will be a huge relief to developers and locals in Sumner County and elsewhere who’ve been proceeding under the assumption that the law was constitutional. It also should be some comfort to state lawmakers looking for a cash source to offset declining state revenue. But even the court acknowledged the ambiguity of the setup: Under the state constitution, the state must control the “ownership and operation” of the casinos, yet they will be managed by private contractors.
In his State of the Government address, Wyandotte County Unified Government Mayor Joe Reardon was able to ponder what to do with all the casino and slot machine revenue that county sees ahead. He said he wants to “ensure that every dollar of gaming revenue we receive from the new casino†— an estimated $7 million to $10 million per year — “goes directly toward property tax reduction.†He’s also talking about funding a college scholarship program and improving neighborhood infrastructure. Of course, Wyandotte County’s current property tax rate is about 12.5 percent higher than the combined rates in Wichita and Sedgwick County. Reardon even spoke of making his county’s property tax rate competitive with that of Wichita and Sedgwick County.
Though Mulvane residents are deeply divided on the issue, it wasn’t too surprising that the Mulvane City Council endorsed a Harrah’s casino resort proposal this week, given the 1 percent share of revenue that is at stake. After the Sumner County Commission didn’t endorse either of the two casino proposals for the Mulvane exit of the Kansas Turnpike, instead picking two proposals at the Wellington exit, the Mulvane City Council annexed strips of land linking the town to where the casino would be located, about five miles away. The council’s endorsement of the project (and its possible future endorsement of the other Mulvane proposal) makes the Mulvane exit the most likely spot to land the casino — as the Kansas Lottery will want the proposal that can make the state the most money.
Sumner County commissioners seemingly put public support above potential revenue today in endorsing the two proposals to build a Wellington casino. That may be good politics. But the decision also snubs two of the biggest names in gaming, Harrah’s Entertainment and MGM Mirage, whose Mulvane proposals had the best chance of turning the complex into a destination resort for the region. You have to hand it to Wellington boosters for making their case. But this decision may cause state officials, who will make the final choice, to wonder: What were they thinking?
Posted by Rhonda Holman
So much for no one being willing to build a destination casino in Sumner County, as some gaming opponents claimed during the Sedgwick County debate. Four companies have filed proposals, including industry giants Harrah’s Entertainment and MGM Mirage.
Harrah’s wants to build a $500 million resort at the Mulvane exit of the Kansas Turnpike. It would include 275 hotel rooms, a championship golf course, and 30,000 square feet of convention space. And that’s just for the first phase of its development plan.
Harrah’s estimates that its project would annually provide Sumner County $5.5 million in revenue sharing and $12 million in property taxes, plus increased sales tax revenue.
Other proposals project similar revenues. So unless the Kansas Supreme Court rules that the state’s gaming law is unconstitutional, Sumner County will be hitting the jackpot.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Some key opponents of a Sedgwick County casino dismissed arguments that rejecting it here would just mean a casino would go next door in Sumner County. No one would make that size of an investment in rural Sumner County, they said. Yet Bob Knight’s group, which now includes casino giant MGM Mirage, filed its proposal with the state today. That plan (in photo) includes a 250-room hotel, a spa, golf course, and meeting and entertainment venues. Several competing proposals are expected from other groups.
It appears that the only way a casino isn’t coming to this area is if the Kansas Supreme Court rules that the state law is unconstitutional.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
The defeat of gambling in Sedgwick County last week seems to have confirmed Wichita’s conservative stereotype in Kansas politics.
“Most of us are probably thinking had the Rapture been Monday, this sucker woulda gone,” Capitol watcher Martin Hawver said on public television’s “Kansas Week” over the weekend. “But right now, people are a little surprised that bankers and civic leaders really jumped out on this. They tend not to do that, although it was kind of impressive the voter turnout you had. It was better than the turnout on the gay marriage vote, and everything we heard from here was that people were disconnecting from life support to go vote against gay marriage down in Sedgwick County.”
On the south-central Kansas’ casino likely landing in Sumner County, Hawver added: “The nice thing about a casino is, wherever you put it, people will come.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Now that Sedgwick County has rejected expanded gaming, some are asking whether a casino will really happen down the road in Sumner County.
Almost certainly. There’s nothing stopping it, since the county’s voters already approved it in 2005. The failure of the Sedgwick County slots option sealed the deal — an expanded and competitive greyhound track “racino” was the only plausible reason why casino interests might choose not build a destination casino in Sumner.
As it is, the casino market here is wide open.
The only other obstacle is a planned constitutional challenge of the Kansas gaming law, but those are long odds.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
At least one elected official isn’t holding back her frustration at Tuesday’s gaming vote results. “I am really disappointed,” Wichita Vice Mayor Sharon Fearey (in photo) told The Eagle editorial board. “I think Sumner County is laughing all the way to the bank.”
Fearey said gaming supporters didn’t do a good job of educating the public about the economic benefits. “We’re losing a heck of a lot of property taxes,” she said of the loss of the proposed $225 million casino, which she said — contrary to opponents’ claims — would have provided some money for local schools. And she pointed to a 2004 study that said a Wichita casino would provide 1,155 jobs. “It’s a huge missed opportunity.”
Fearey also expressed annoyance with the high moral tone of the casino opponents. “Are the people of Wyandotte County less moral than us? Or, for heaven’s sake, the people of Sumner?”
Posted by Randy Scholfield
The local anti-gaming group, flush with victory in Tuesday’s vote, is now setting its sights on Topeka and lawmakers who approved gaming. “Every Democrat or Republican who voted for it is going to be vulnerable,” Kahrs told The Eagle’s Mark McCormick. “Both parties are going to lose incumbents over this issue.”
I’m not convinced. The anti-gaming coalition won’t hold together in the wake of this vote, which was about Wichita’s future. The concerned business leaders and most voters got what they wanted: no casino here. Most aren’t going to be interested in a punitive crusade — that really will be just about social conservatives pushing their moral agenda.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
The No Casinos in Sedgwick County group, led by attorney Mark Kahrs, waged a smart, well-organized, effective campaignthat was a model of community grassroots organizing. It’s also interesting to note that the gaming measures weren’t defeated by social conservatives alone. The broad "no" coalition included liberal churches, too, as well as secular business interests and average citizens.
Moreover, the prevailing wisdom was that a large turnout would help the "yes" vote, but it didn’t happen. That seems to indicate that a lot of Wichitans who initially leaned toward a "yes" vote (70 percent of voters, according to an April poll) were swayed to change their position by the "no" campaign.
The "yes" campaign, by contrast, seemed to be going through the motions. No one was out front, not even Phil Ruffin, who spent more than $800,000 on this lackluster campaign. You could say he didn’t get his money’s worth.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
It’s interesting that for all the discussed economic impacts of the gaming vote, pro and con, not much was said about the possibility of Phil Ruffin closing Wichita Greyhound Park so quickly — within 90 days, he announced after the vote tally.
Shuttering the track will cost some 250 jobs, he said. And it will scuttle the possibility of more jobs with an expanded "racino."
Hypotheticals aside, this is one immediate and very real economic impact from the gaming "no" vote. Another is the loss of some $1 million a year that the greyhound park foundation contributes to local nonprofits and charities.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Wichita City Council members don’t support turning Century II into a casino. And the developer who proposed the idea announced last month that he was dropping it. Yet the No Casinos in Sedgwick County group keeps trying to scare voters into believing that something that was never going to happen still could. A recent mailing, under the heading "Destroying Century II," said: "They claim it’s off the table — but can we really trust them."
Voters may be asking whether they can trust the anti-gambling group when it resorts to such scare tactics.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
It’s good that, prompted by an Eagle editorial, two more local city officials have gone on record — or at least explained their silence — about the Aug. 7 casino vote.
Mayor Carl Brewer released a statement Friday saying that he will not take a stand publicly because “a decision regarding casinos in Sedgwick County rests with the voters.” Well, the editorial board understands that, too — no one is asking public officials to browbeat or make this decision for voters. But it would be informative for Wichitans to know how their elected leaders approach this momentous community decision and whether, in those leaders’ informed opinion, they think expanded gambling would be good or bad for Wichita and local governments.
City Council member Jeff Longwell also told The Eagle editorial board Friday that he wanted the decision to rest with voters, but that he personally planned to vote “yes” on the slots question. He remains undecided on the casino measure. “I’m still struggling with it,” he said. What he’s sure of, though, is that “I don’t want it in the core area” of Wichita.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
I argue in my column today that amid all the debate about casino effects and benefits, an obvious fact is being overlooked: Millions of Americans think gambling and casinos are actually fun.
You’d never suspect that listening to the anti-gaming folks.
But many Wichitans have no problem whatsoever thinking of a casino as entertainment, including many people who have no real interest in going to one.
What’s wrong with that?
Posted by Randy Scholfield
The Aug. 7 vote on whether to allow a casino in Sedgwick County could be a toss up. A new KWCH-Channel 12 Eyewitness News/Wichita Eagle poll shows that 50 percent of likely voters supporting a casino and 49 percent opposing it. If accurate, that means turnout will decide the election — and that likely favors the opponents, who have been much more organized and passionate than casino supporters.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Are the multiplying pro- and anti-gambling ads changing many minds in Sedgwick County? Not a lot, based on a SurveyUSA Poll for KWCH-TV, Channel 12: 51 percent of those polled said they had been for a Sedgwick County casino and continue to be; 33 percent said they were against it, both earlier and now. Only 11 percent had moved from being for it to against it, and only 2 percent had flipped the other way. Still, in a close election, a few swayed votes on either side may be all it takes.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
It’s significant that the board of directors of the Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce voted Wednesday to oppose expanded gambling in Sedgwick County. That’s not an easy stance to take, given the diversity of business interests that the chamber represents. But the vote speaks to the strong conviction of many business leaders — including past chamber chairmen who urged the board to oppose gambling — that a casino would have an overall negative impact on local businesses and the economy.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Gambling opponents have spread fears about Century II being turned into a casino. But that was never going to happen, as the Wichita City Council didn’t support the plan. So it was good last week that the Canadian developer who proposed the idea announced that he was officially dropping it.
Voters still won’t know where a casino might go if expanded gambling is approved Aug. 7. But they can stop worrying about it taking over Century II.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
The Eagle editorial board recommends a “no” vote on casinos and slots on today’s Opinion pages. It was a difficult decision, as there are good arguments on both sides. But the board didn’t believe that expanded gambling would enhance a city heading in the right direction. A casino wouldn’t bring ruin to Wichita, as some opponents suggest. But, at best, it would be a distraction from the long-term goals of Visioneering Wichita.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
If you listen to the dire predictions of many casino opponents, a Wichita casino will end life as we know it in our fair city, unleashing a wave of crime and economic decline and forever damaging the community’s character.
Don’t believe it, we argue in today’s editorial. An Eagle series this week is taking a close look at the actual experience of communities with casinos, and the reporters have found that cities such as Des Moines seem to have prospered from casino tax revenues while not suffering any increase in major crime.
People might still choose, on balance, to oppose a casino in Wichita, but the evidence doesn’t support doomsday scenarios.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Sedgwick County commissioners took a noticeable step back from gaming this week when they called off a request for proposals for the Kansas Coliseum that focused exclusively on casino projects. With an anti-casino campaign gearing up, it appears commissioners are feeling political heat and nervous about being identified as pro-gaming.
At any rate, it makes sense to get other proposals about the future of the Coliseum site. As Commissioner Tim Norton said, "We’ve kind of gotten off on gaming, but we need to think about other options."
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Concluding that “ownership and operation are flexible concepts,” the Kansas Supreme Court today gave the green light to the 2007 expanded gambling law and the four destination casinos planned around the state. That will be a huge relief to developers and locals in Sumner County and elsewhere who’ve been proceeding under the assumption that the law was constitutional. It also should be some comfort to state lawmakers looking for a cash source to offset declining state revenue. But even the court acknowledged the ambiguity of the setup: Under the state constitution, the state must control the “ownership and operation” of the casinos, yet they will be managed by private contractors.
