The real benefit of a casino is the multiplier effect on the region.

It seems, almost every November, Mainers march into voting booths to decide the next casino proposal.

These votes have gained steam since 2003, when a split ballot allowed Bangor to proceed with a “racino,” while a Native American-sponsored casino in Sanford was struck down. Another tribal racino effort in Calais was rejected.

So here we are again, this year over a resort casino in Oxford County.

I won’t discuss the laundry list of provisions in the referendum; they only cloud the real questions Mainers, those in Western Maine especially, need to ask themselves.

The moral issue of gambling and its effect on Mainers has been decided. The Legislature has dozens of revenue streams from the lottery, to which the scratch tickets littering the ground outside most convenience stores is testament.

And Mainers gave further blessing to start building casinos when Bangor’s racino slid beneath the radar, despite debate of a full-blown resort casino in southern Maine.

Rather than more philosophical debates about gambling, it might be more constructive for this state to assess how, if a casino or two were built, they would be leveraged for the greatest economic impact to the state and the region in which they’re located.

Our current approach to casinos is searching out an economically vulnerable region and then singing the song of job creation. With the current economic troubles nationally and in Maine, this message of job creation is selling.

But casinos have never been and never will be an economic development panacea.

Beyond jobs created in a casino and resort, the real benefit is the multiplier effect in the region. Given this, it is valuable to gauge how the spinoff effect has played out elsewhere.

Bangor, the only slot parlor in Maine, has long had, as part of its economic development strategy, reclaiming the Penobscot River waterfront as a commercial and hospitality district. The rise of the Bangor Folk Festival and its many hundreds of thousands of visitors demonstrates the success of that effort.

There were other needs for a district anchor, which included replacing the aging Bangor Auditorium. Without support from the Legislature for a local sales tax to help fund that major project, the city of Bangor is positioning itself to leverage revenues from the racino to fund a new arena/convention facility.

For Bangor, the racino is not the economic strategy. It was leverage to fulfill their strategy.

The situation is different in Oxford County. While the movement to site a casino has built momentum over the past year, there is limited discussion on the economic strategy for Western Maine and how a casino would advance it.

Over the past few months, two towns were discussed as possible locations; Rumford and Oxford. The economic impacts would have been vastly different in these different communities.

For example, a Rumford casino would likely have had visitors traveling north on Route 4 through Lewiston-Auburn to reach their destination, creating possible spinoffs in communities in that corridor: Turner, Jay, Livermore Falls, etc.

In Oxford, however, the major travel route is Route 26 through Gray and Poland, which bypasses Lewiston-Auburn completely. This does not even consider how such a facility furthers local revitalization plans, as in Bangor.

Maine cannot afford to be trapped in constant debate of rural jobs versus the perception of Maine in catalogues.

It’s unproductive and it divides us.

Without a clear Maine strategy, a casino is the path of least resistance for wealthy developers, in this case from Las Vegas. Instead, the Legislature and governor should be forced to resolve locating these facilities with the existing economic development strategies in the state.

It’s smarter to leverage gaming, not rely on it.

Jonathan LaBonte, of New Auburn, is a columnist for the Sun Journal. E-mail: [email protected].