Prince George’s County State’s Attorney Glenn F. Ivey and elected officials raised their voices against legalizing slot machines on Tuesday during a stop in Laurel as part of a statewide anti-slots campaign.
‘‘I don’t need things like slots to bring additional community problems into the county,” Ivey said at a news conference in front of Deerfield Run Elementary School, about three miles from the Laurel Park racecourse, a potential site for the gambling machines.
Ivey spokesman Ramon Korionoff said Prince George’s was the second of at least 10 stops that will be made across the state ahead of a Nov. 4 referendum. The referendum, if passed, will change the state constitution to allow up to 15,000 machines in Allegany, Anne Arundel, Cecil and Worcester counties and Baltimore City.
Scott Arceneaux, senior advisor to Marylanders United to Stop Slots, which is organizing the statewide campaign, said the campaign runs from Memorial Day to Labor Day with stops at all of the proposed sites. The first stop was in Anne Arundel County.
Legislation passed during the November General Assembly special session stipulates that 5.5 percent of the revenue will go to local governments, about 50 percent to education, 33 percent to license the machines and 7 percent directly to the horse-racing industry.
Officials debated at the news conference the merits of the slots referendum and associated bill, pointing to an estimated $95.3 million that could go to the horse-racing industry in fiscal 2013. The State Lottery Commission will oversee the industry and a special commission will pick who will be awarded slots licenses.
Del. Victor Ramirez (D-Dist. 47) of Cheverly said Laurel Park slots would attract thousands of county residents, and ‘‘the deal that has been cut only benefits the rich horse industry.”
Del. Aisha Braveboy (D-Dist. 25) of Mitchellville said the state should invest in attracting industries such as biotechnology to bolster the state’s economy and create high-paying jobs.
‘‘We will not see any real revenues [from slots] for five to six years,” she said. ‘‘We’re really not talking about an immediate fix to an immediate problem.”
But Fred Puddester, chairman of pro-slots group For Maryland, For Our Future, said the only alternative to slots revenue in balancing the state’s budget is to raise taxes or make further cuts in spending.
He also pointed to a 2007 study done by state Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez that found ‘‘slots in neighboring jurisdictions do not appear to have instigated an increase in crime in Delaware and West Virginia.”
‘‘We’re doing limited slot machines very similar to that which is in Charlestown or Dover, Del., and when you go to those places you don’t see a lot of crime,” Puddester said.
At the news conference, officials focused on social problems they believe slot machines create, including gambling addiction and crime. Some referred to a 2004 Greater Prince George’s Business Roundtable study on another slots proposal.
GPGBR President and CEO Jim Estepp said that study found a high social cost to surrounding areas with slots locations. The new bill does provide some funding to address those problems, but Estepp added, ‘‘We feel some of those findings are valid anywhere you have gaming.”
The business roundtable has no official position on slots.
Ivey referred to the study and said his office would not be able to handle the increase in crime that slot machines in Laurel Park – on Route 198 just outside Prince George’s in Anne Arundel County – could produce in the county.
County school board member Rosalind Johnson (Dist. 1) of Laurel said slots would negatively affect her community, including increasing traffic on surrounding roads.
‘‘It takes money from the families of the children I was elected to serve,” Johnson said.
Johnson said although the slots legislation creates an education fund, the money actually coming to the schools is dependent upon the governor.
E-mail Elahe Izadi at eizadi@gazette.net.
