By Stephanie Samuel

Sentinel Staff Writer

Opponents of slot machine legislation are considering a lawsuit to battle perceived bias in the ballot question for the referendum video slots terminals unveiled last week.

Scott Arceneaux, senior advisor to Maryland United to Stop Slots, said the group has been left with few options after the Maryland State Board of Elections issued a letter saying it could not challenge the authority of the question's writer, Secretary of State John McDonough.

Slot opponents decried the question, arguing that McDonough lobbied for gambling interests for almost 20 years. Arceneaux said its campaign asked McDonough to recuse him self from writing the question a month ago.

"There's certainly other people in the state secretary office that could write the question," Arceneaux said. However he said McDonough declined.

Arceneaux also sent a letter to the state board of elections, asking the board to reject the language of the ballot and allow the public to raise its concerns at this Thursday's board meeting. However, one was sent back on behalf of Board of Elections Chairman Robert Walker, stating that the board could not change the ballot question.

"The law does not give us any authority to edit or rewrite or alter the question in any way," said Board of Elections Deputy Administrator Ross Goldstein.

Arceneaux and other opponents also argue that the question's wording is deceptive. Opponents argue that instead of stating video gambling terminals would be placed in Worchester County, among other places, it should more clearly state Ocean City, the popular family vacation destination. Some local business owners have already rejected the idea of bringing slots to the boardwalk. During an Ocean City rally, State Controller Peter Franchot said slot casinos would "destroy" the boardwalk atmosphere, which he said makes Ocean City so famous.

Proponents also argue that the wording does not fully disclose where the resulting money will go. The way the question's current language reads, the revenue raised through video gaming would fund state public education from kindergarten through 12th grade, school construction and capital improvements, in addition to capital projects in the state's community colleges and the state's university system. However Arceneaux says of voters, "They have no idea they're voting for a one-half billion [dollar] giveaway to the horse racing industry."

Maryland State Teacher Association President and slots proponent Clara Floyd refutes that charge.

"The referendum language released by the Maryland Secretary of State ... accurately reflects what was passed by the General Assembly last year," she said in a statement. The MSTA formally endorsed slots in March of this year.

MSTA spokesman Daniel Kuafman said it believes the wording to be fair.

"It follows almost to the letter the wording that was passed in the legislation," he said. He says he believes that 60 percent of state residents support the referendum in light of the state's budgetary problems and other states' acceptance of slots.

"Other states are doing it, and they are taking away money that could be used for education," Kuafman said.

As for a lawsuit, Kuafman said, "I feel that is a distraction more than anything else. People just want to get it over with."

The referendum on video lottery terminals in Maryland will appear on November's electoral ballot. The referendum asks voters to decide whether the Maryland Constitution should be rewritten to allow 15,000 video slot machines to be operated in the state. The machine would be introduced in Baltimore City and Cecil, Anne Arundel, Worchester and Allegany Counties. The closest destinations to Prince Georgians would be Pimlico Race track in Laurel. Prince George's County Councilman Will Campos (D-Dist. 2), State's Attorney Glenn Ivey and Del. Joseline Pena-Melnyk (D-Dist. 21) have all spoken out against slots.

Contact Stephanie Samuel at

ssamuel@thesentinel.com