A woman plays a slot machine at a casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
A proposed anti-casino ballot initiative is still alive following a decision from the Arkansas Supreme Court on Monday, though its fate remains uncertain with another decision pending.
The court did not decide whether the popular name and ballot title of the proposed constitutional amendment are insufficient.
Another ruling will determine if votes will be counted on Issue 2, which would repeal a Pope County casino license and require any new casino in the state to be approved in a countywide special election before a license is issued. The measure is already on the ballot.
In Monday’s ruling, written by Justice Courtney Rae Hudson, the high court denied a petition from the Arkansas Canvassing Compliance Committee (ACCC) challenging the findings of Special Master Randy Wright, who was assigned to hear the case.
By agreeing with a report Wright filed in September, the court denied ACCC’s claims that the ballot question committee Local Voters in Charge illegally financially incentivized its canvassers and spread false information about the measure’s purpose. ACCC also argued that all signatures should be disqualified because an agent signed in place of a sponsor.
Regarding incentives, the court said: “While petitioners produced multiple videos as proof of an unlawful offer to pay under subdivision (g)(1), they never offered evidence of the total number of signatures collected by the 14 paid canvassers recorded in the video. Furthermore, none of those paid canvassers reported when they were offered $100 for 100 signatures or who made the unlawful offers. An improper offer without more is not enough to invalidate signatures.”
Wright also found that the approximately 116,000 signatures validated by Secretary of State John Thurston should not be disqualified outright because an agent signed canvasser affidavits in place of a sponsor. Thurston, through his legal counsel with the attorney general’s office, argued this during the hearing and in subsequent filings.
In the Supreme Court decision, Hudson cites state code that defines “sponsor” and “person” and concludes that under the broad statutory meaning, the people who signed for Local Voters in Charge “were eligible to sign the certification.”
Special master recommends disqualifying thousands of anti-casino measure signatures
In response to the decision, Attorney General Tim Griffin said, “I respect the Court’s decision. The Court has not yet ruled on the challenge to this petition’s ballot title and popular name, so we do not yet know whether votes for this ballot petition will be counted. We await the Court’s ruling.”
Of the validated signatures, Wright found that nearly 6,000 should be thrown out due to insufficient addresses. Still, Local Voters in Charge’s signature total exceeds the 90,704 required for a proposed constitutional amendment.
The Supreme Court decision sided with Wright on the issues and denied ACCC’s petition challenging the signature collection. Count 2 of the case challenges the popular name and ballot title of the proposed constitutional amendment.
In ACCC’s original petition, the group claims the name and ballot title are misleading and “do not provide the voter with sufficient information to make an informed decision.”
“While disappointing, we still await the Court’s decision on the ballot title challenge, said Allison Burum, a spokesperson for the ACCC. “Issue 2 is misleading, and its sole purpose is to undo the will of Arkansas voters by eliminating the fourth casino license they approved in 2018. Voters will see this as a bad deal — out-of-state billionaires trying to manipulate Arkansans into changing the constitution to benefit their own self interest. If passed, Issue 2 would cost Arkansans thousands of jobs and much needed tax revenue, including funding for our roads.”
Monday’s decision doesn’t indicate when a ruling on Count 2 could come. Early voting in Arkansas starts Monday, Oct. 21.
“We’re grateful for today’s Arkansas Supreme Court ruling,” said Hans Stiritz, spokesperson for Local Voters in Charge. “It’s no small thing for the Supreme Court to unanimously rule that we got it right on the canvassing process, with over [110,000] signatures ultimately affirmed.”
He continued, “Issue 2’s message of local voter control — that communities should have the final say on a casino in their own hometown — is resonating across the state. We look forward to the court’s final decision on the ballot language challenge, with hope that the vote of the people will be counted on Issue 2 in November.”
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.