Black Bear Entertainment, the group proposing a four-season resort and casino in Oxford County, never intended to insert itself in the issue of slot machines at the Bates Mill site,  and we believe, based upon when the facts are finally presented, that Lewiston voters will come to their own conclusions. Recent comments by spokesmen Stavros Mendros and Peter Robinson, one of the known investors in the Lewiston project, leaves us no alternative but to respond. Their obvious intention to turn this into an “us vs. them” issue requires us to give you the facts.

Process and history

Gaming initiatives are complex; only one has passed in Maine. Looking back at the proposals of Bangor in 2003, Calais in 2007 and Oxford in 2008 and 2010, not one signature was obtained on any petition regarding a municipal vote or statewide vote without a certified petition from the Secretary of State’s Office outlining the entire law.

The Lewiston proponents are asking citizens to sign a petition that would eventually lead to a slot machine parlor in Lewiston, and to do so without seeing what the law would be that governs that facility.

Rightfully, the citizens of Lewiston should ask to see the results of an economic impact study on that project which outlines job creation, payroll impact and expected revenues.

These studies cost tens of thousands of dollars if done by reputable gaming analysts but are required to accurately report fiscal and economic impact on a community.

They should see studies illustrating how to funnel traffic to the facility in a downtown location on one-way streets.

It is reasonable to expect this type of information to be available to citizens, land deals notwithstanding, before being asked to sign a petition that could have a significant impact on the area.

In contrast, we have provided this information for Oxford County; promotemaine.com gives every Maine citizen a thorough examination of the project. This Web site was available to the public well before we started asking for signatures.

Transparency

A recent editorial in the Sun Journal, “Gambling on secrecy is not a business plan” (Jan. 18) questioned the business decision of the Lewiston proponents to not reveal all of their investors, and asking residents to sign a petition that could change the make-up of downtown Lewiston without knowing who is behind the effort. The Oxford proposal created a Web site with complete biographies on all of our investors before asking for a single signature, and asking the citizens of Lewiston to do otherwise is a tremendous leap of faith.

Economics

I cannot compare the two proposals, as the final Lewiston proposal has not been revealed. I can tell you the comments from Peter Robinson questioning the economics of the Oxford proposal are flat-out wrong.

Our location will be a small four-season resort about 20 miles from downtown Lewiston located off Route 26 in Oxford.

To characterize this facility as “in the middle of nowhere” when it is located on a state highway where millions of vehicles travel every year is so disingenuous I thought an anti-gaming supporter was writing it.

And this resort will not be a drain on Androscoggin County, as Mr. Robinson would like you to believe.

The Lewiston-Auburn area is the closest economic center to Oxford and one can reasonably expect a sizable spillover in the purchase of goods and services from the Oxford resort’s patrons and employees.

Additionally, with the 800 to 1,000 jobs being created, you can expect folks from Androscoggin County to become employees. It is a win/win for both regions.

Probability and outcome

Is Peter Robinson suggesting Lewiston citizens reject the Oxford proposal in hopes of passing one in Lewiston the following year? Would that be sound advice?

The Oxford casino vote of 2010 could shape Maine gaming policy for years to come. A “bird in hand” philosophy could be the best advice. 

Because these are statewide votes, and not just local, a sound argument could be made that if Oxford passes in 2010, Maine voters will not endorse another gaming initiative 20 miles away one year later. This reasonably expected outcome has a high probability, but if the Oxford resort is defeated, in spite of what many consider to be an excellent piece of legislation, even a higher probability suggests the statewide voting public will be certain to reject any gaming proposal in 2011 or for many years thereafter.

Rejecting the Oxford proposal this November may doom any future gaming proposal anywhere in Maine for the foreseeable future.

Last year’s gaming proposal in Oxford won the support of Androscoggin County. With substantially better legislation, 800 to 1,000 jobs in Western Maine and 70 percent of tax dollars from this project going to education to improve the lives of every single Maine citizen, we anticipate the people of Androscoggin County will enthusiastically support the Oxford proposal this November.

Peter Martin is the spokesman for Black Bear Entertainment. He has lobbied for the orderly expansion of gaming in Maine since 1993 and opened Maine’s first off-track wagering facility. He also helped author LD 1820, the law that governs slot machine regulation in Maine.