Casino fight might head to court

One initiative might proceed, even though vote would be moot

By steve law and shannon wells

The Portland Tribune, Jul 29, 2010

kyle green / TRIBUNE PHOTO

The old Multnomah Kennel Club in Wood Village, the former site of greyhound races, is the proposed site for a nontribal casino. A proposed constitutional amendment to allow the casino has failed to make the ballot.

It’s a gamble, but both sides in a looming mega-fight over a proposed private casino east of Portland may seek judicial rulings to determine what goes before Oregon voters in November.

A proposed constitutional amendment allowing one private casino in Oregon failed to get enough valid initiative petition signatures, Secretary of State Kate Brown said Tuesday. But a companion statutory measure specifying that the private casino be located at the former greyhound race track in Wood Village did qualify for the ballot.

There’s no way backers could build a casino in Wood Village without a constitutional amendment. But that may not prevent a multimillion-dollar slugfest over a ballot measure that may prove to be moot.

There’s nothing that state elections officials could do to prevent the statutory measure from appearing on the ballot, says Don Hamilton, Brown’s spokesman. “Court orders,” he notes, “are a different issue.”

As a result, casino promoters, including a pair of Lake Oswego businessmen backed by a Canadian investment fund, say they may seek legal recourse. Their main hope is challenging the state’s process of invalidating petition signatures on the constitutional amendment.

And representatives of tribal casinos may seek legal recourse of their own to keep the statutory measure off the ballot, says Justin Martin, a lobbyist for the Grande Ronde tribe and manager of the Oregon Tribal Gaming Alliance.

The goal, he says, would be “to keep Oregonians from having to make a false decision.”

But the clock is ticking, because the Oregon Constitution requires the state to decide what initiatives to place on the ballot by Sunday, Aug. 1, Hamilton says.

Traditionally, courts do not act on the legality of initiatives until after voters have spoken. “Measures that go on the ballot, their legal status is determined later,” Hamilton notes.

1 | 2 Next Page >>

Facebook	Digg	Del.icio.us
Newsvine	Stumbleupon	Reddit