Whether the harm to the state’s image is worth the increased revenue from casino gambling was the significant query for opponents of a bill to let 1 casino to operate in New Hampshire have been asking at a public hearing Tuesday.
Supporters of Senate Bill 152 responded with queries of their very own: Are casino opponents prepared to reside with the highest state college tuition within the nation, inadequate mental health solutions and millions of dollars a year of New Hampshire income flowing into Massachusetts?

About 100 individuals attended the day-long hearing before the joint Finance and Methods and Implies committee, which meets once again currently to begin reviewing the bill that last month passed the Senate, 16-8.

The Property has never ever authorized expanded gambling and gambling supporters acknowledge they have an uphill battle.

But supporters think this time could be different because Massachusetts has authorized 3 new casinos and a single video slot machine facility.

“With intense competitors from Massachusetts looming, the time for you to move forward is now to advantage New Hampshire even though maintaining our brand as a secure, family-friendly state using a vibrant outdoor economy,” stated Gov. Maggie Hassan, who testified in assistance on the bill. “As we’ve got proven before, we can do that the New Hampshire way.”

She said casino revenue will assistance spend for higher education, hospital aid, school building projects and will develop jobs.

Senate Finance Committee Chair and bill co-sponsor Sen. Chuck Morse, R-Salem, mentioned the state has an opportunity it can’t afford to miss.

“Without the income from this bill, it’s going to be tough to fund the (state operating) spending budget,” he mentioned.

House price range writers did pass a price range without gambling revenues, but Morse has mentioned with no the casino revenue, about $100 million will have to become reduce from the spending budget.

Opponents step up

Gambling opponents ranged from religious leaders towards the hospitality sector to non-profit performing arts centers. They stated adding a casino will modify the state’s image and generate unfair competitors that could close lots of compact companies.

“We’ll danger losing almost everything we’re identified for – our mountains and lakes – and we’ll lose our competitive advantage,” stated Bob Goodman, professor emeritus of hospitality management in the University of New Hampshire. “This casino bill insults our New Hampshire image, and there’s no going back once the camel gets his nose below the tent.”

Other people mentioned casinos target one of the most vulnerable citizens who do not know their poor odds of winning when playing the video slot machines.

Bob Schneider of Claremont mentioned, “It is a regressive tax around the poor plus the ignorant,” when Sen. Jeanie Forrester, R-Meredith, mentioned casinos would “taint the New Hampshire brand and cannibalize the profits of New Hampshire corporations.”

The cash

The bill would allow up to five,000 video slot machines and 150 table games.

Supporters say it’ll present as much as $130 million annually for the state, even though doing nothing will price the state amongst $50 million to $80 million a year in lost revenue.

Under the bill, 45 percent of the state’s share of gambling income – or about $50 million annually – would visit greater education.

The same amount of income would visit fix the state’s roads and bridges, and ten percent or about $10 million, will be used for North Country economic development.

The host community would get three percent of net casino revenue, abutting communities 1 percent.

1 % could be for treating trouble gamblers.

The bill includes a hold harmless provision so current charity gaming organizations would retain their current earnings.

A gaming enforcement unit would be established inside the State Police, while the Lottery Commission would accept and review applications and also oversee casino operations. The Lawyer General’s Workplace would conduct background checks around the applicants.

Law enforcement split

SB 152 has divided the law enforcement neighborhood, using the NH Troopers Association and NH Police Association supporting the bill, along with the NH Association of Chiefs of Police and also the Lawyer General’s Office opposed.

Seth Cooper, president from the Troopers Association, stated the bill delivers adequate regulations and enforcement, and noted casinos do increase motor vehicle and alcohol offenses, but not critical crime.

On the other hand, Deputy Lawyer Basic Ann Rice disagreed.

“The revenue stream from gambling comes at a huge societal cost,” Rice stated. “There is often a clear connection among the introduction of casino gambling and an increase in crime.”

Other folks stated even though the bill limits expanded gaming to 1 “high-end, very regulated casino on the state’s southern border,” once the foot is within the door, there might be much more casinos and slot machines will likely be in every comfort shop and bar.

Gambling opponent Lew Feldstein, who served on former Gov. John Lynch’s Gaming Study Commission, mentioned, “One casino will cause unstoppable proliferation.”

There are going to be a slot barn within 30 miles of any resident’s house and in shops, restaurants and bars, he mentioned, as has happened in each and every state that legalized casinos.

“I’d be prepared to bet on it,” Feldstein mentioned. “I’ll bet you double or absolutely nothing someone will likely be standing right here in this effectively pushing for more (once a single is here).”

Generating it fair

Other people support the bill’s idea, but choose to ensure everybody has an chance to compete for the one casino in an open and fair approach.

Attorney Tom Leonard, who represents Green Meadow Golf Club in Hudson, which has an interest in competing for the facility, stated the “time constraints within this bill operate against an open and fair approach.”

The bill’s prime sponsor, Sen. Lou D’Allesandro, D-Manchester, mentioned he feels like former Rep. Larry Picket of Keene, who tried for many years to pass a sweepstakes bill. Fifty years ago, Picket was finally thriving.

“Larry proved that for those who have the courage of one’s convictions and are prepared to function tirelessly, you can succeed,” D’Allesandro mentioned.