House, Senate give OK to slots measure

AUGUSTA – The Maine House and Senate on Wednesday both signed off on a bill paving the way for up to 1,500 slot machines at Bangor Raceway.

“We’ve come a long way,” Sen. Kenneth Gagnon, D-Waterville, told his fellow senators, referring to months of debate over LD 1820, designed to impose strict regulations on the state’s new gambling industry.

Both houses must still take final votes on the legislation before it is sent to the governor’s office for enactment. The votes are expected today.

The bill, proposed by Gov. John Baldacci, would replace much of the citizen-initiated legislation passed by voters in November that first authorized slots at the state’s harness racing tracks.

But that voter-approved bill, Gagnon explained, provided little in the way of state oversight of the so-called “racino.”

“We would have created kind of a Dodge City, a wild, wild west of gambling,” he said.

While the bill itself had little trouble in the Senate, which voted 29-6 in favor, a late amendment stalled the legislation there well into the evening as senators debated whether to attach a provision some say could reduce state oversight of the slot operation.

“We are treading on ground we know little about in the state of Maine … ground that is treacherous,” Sen. Richard Bennett, R-Norway, said of the amendment, which would allow a newly formed gambling control board to adopt a less expensive computer system to monitor the slots rather than a more costly alternative that would offer the state greater control over the machines.

The Senate approved the amendment, which the House later endorsed without debate.

Penn National Gaming, the company poised to run the Bangor slots parlor, had requested the change, which also received an endorsement – albeit a lukewarm one – from the governor’s office.

“It’s not perfect,” said Gov. John Baldacci’s spokesman Lee Umphrey. “But we believe it maintains the governor’s need for robust oversight.”

Penn officials argued the change would reduce state costs and thus remove the need for a new state tax on the slots. The tax – expected to net the state upwards of $8 million each year – would be in addition to the 39 percent of slots revenue it already stands to receive.

Late Wednesday, Penn lobbyists were still shopping for a sponsor to offer another amendment to replace the hefty new tax with a one-time $3 million fee to help with state administrative costs.

Gagnon predicted any such proposal would meet a swift defeat.

“There will be no agreement on that,” said Gagnon, who has repeatedly asserted that the tax won’t cause Penn officials to walk away from the deal, despite daily suggestions they might.

Little had changed Wednesday.

“We remain concerned about the effect [the tax] would have on this project moving forward,” Penn spokesman Eric Schippers said. “We obviously have a very important decision to make.”

Wednesday’s session came amid intensified lobbying efforts on the controversial slots bill.

A full-page newspaper advertisement chided lawmakers for changing the citizen-initiated bill. The anti-gambling group CasinosNo! launched telephone and e-mail campaigns opposing efforts to scale back state oversight of the slots.