Officials move to block Harrah’s casino vote

Brooke Donald

Friday, Aug. 13, 2004 | 9 a.m.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- Within hours of the Rhode Island Supreme Court's advisory opinion Thursday that a planned casino referendum is unconstitutional, Attorney General Patrick Lynch and Gov. Don Carcieri filed a motion in Superior Court to prevent the question from being considered by voters.

The opinion that legislation passed by the General Assembly including the West Warwick casino question is unconstitutional does not automatically remove the casino question from the November ballot.

Carcieri, an ardent opponent of casino gambling, had sought the advisory opinion last month after vetoing "The Rhode Island Gaming Control and Revenue Act" on grounds that it violated state law.

"We should not be asking our citizens to vote on something our Supreme Court has said is unconstitutional," the governor said Thursday.

A hearing to consider the motion filed by Carcieri and Lynch was scheduled for this morning in Superior Court.

The ballot question would ask voters, "Shall there be a casino in the town of West Warwick operated by an affiliate of Harrah's Entertainment in association with the Narragansett Indian tribe?"

In its 21-page opinion, the Supreme Court concluded that the question was unconstitutional because it asks residents to approve an operation forbidden under state law.

The Rhode Island Constitution, the justices said, prohibits all "lotteries" except those operated by the state or already in existence. The proposed casino, they said, would represent one of those prohibited lotteries. Further, it would be controlled by Harrah's, not the state, they said.

The question "asks whether there shall be a casino 'operated by an affiliate of Harrah's Entertainment in association with the Narragansett Indian Tribe?' " the justices wrote. "A clearer identification of the casino operator cannot be imagined."

Democratic leaders who backed the referendum question had argued that the constitution's meaning of lottery does not include a casino.

But the justices replied that courts have defined lotteries as games of chance, and the games referred to in the legislation -- including blackjack, roulette and craps -- fall into that category.

The Narragansetts say the proposed $600 million casino will provide millions of dollars in revenue to the state and tribe. They need voter backing before they can proceed, and the contested ballot measure was their latest effort to get the casino approved.

While the justices didn't weigh the merits of a casino -- Carcieri argues it won't provide any economic or social benefits -- they did consider the implications of presenting voters with a ballot question they deemed violates state law.

"If, as we believe, the question and legislation are void and unconstitutional, then members of the public will waste much money, time, effort and energy to familiarize themselves with the controversial issues that the proposed casino has raised," the justices wrote.

Standing beside Lynch at an afternoon news conference, Secretary of State Matt Brown, whose office handles the ballots, said he supports removing the question from the ballot, but needs a binding ruling to do it.

The deadline for taking issues off the ballot is Aug. 19.

In an effort to strip the question from the ballot, Lynch said he will first seek a temporary restraining order, then request a permanent injunction.

"Placing this referendum on the state ballot will cause irreparable harm in that it will require a vote on an unconstitutional act," Lynch's complaint to Superior Court says.

State Sen. Stephen Alves and House Speaker William Murphy said they were disappointed with the advisory opinion.

"What is most troubling is that the people once again may be denied a voice on the matter," Alves said in a statement.

Lynch said he believes residents should be able to vote on the issue, but added that the votes won't count "if the question is unconstitutional."

Brown said it was too late for lawmakers to rewrite the legislation for this fall's ballot, even if they were to reconvene for such a purpose. The deadline for getting ballot questions to the secretary of state's office was Aug. 4.

A message left with Narragansett Indian Chief Sachem Matthew Thomas wasn't immediately returned.