Pennsylvania's Municipalities are Rejecting Mini-Casinos

More than 400 municipalities have chosen not to host mini-casinos in their communities. The Gaming Control Board says many jurisdictions are opting out to give themselves more time to decide if they want mini-casinos.

Municipalities were given a one-time opportunity, through Dec. 31, to opt out and prohibit the siting of a casino in their jurisdictions. Any borough or township opting out can opt back in, but there won't be another chance to opt out again.

Within the past two weeks, the boroughs of Greencastle and Waynesboro have opted out. Other Franklin County municipalities on the opt-out list are Fannett, Hamilton, Letterkenny, Peters and Southampton townships and the Borough of Mont Alto.

Antrim Township became the latest Tuesday night in a unanimous vote.

“The reasons for having it here when we have existing casinos, at least three that are within an hour of our township, it's just not something that's either aesthetically or financially beneficial to our township. For that reason, I'm opposed to it,” Supervisor Pat Heraty said.

Pennsylvania gambling regulators will hold an auction on Jan. 10 for the state’s existing casino owners to bid on the first of 10 licenses to operate a miniature casino somewhere else in the state. Winning bids selected location also will be revealed at the auction.

The so-called mini-casinos will include at least 300 slot machines and as many as 750, and up to 50 table games. They would have off-track wagering and be a hub for connection to personal devices.

Antrim Township is in line for some gaming coming to the township since the legislation provides for truck stops to host up to five video-gaming terminals.

“I'm aggrieved that we don't have any say that should the truck stop decide that they want to have five slot machines, they can have those five, and we get nothing from it, nothing,” Supervisor Fred Young III said. “All that money goes to the state. Thanks a lot. Again, an unfunded mandate. We get to have it, but we also get to fund and deal with any problems.”

“I think it's a slap in the face to the municipality that the legislature is going to use that money to try to balance their budget and pay for the spending bill they passed this year," he added. "One of the ways they're going to try to do this is increasing the revenue through gambling receipts.”

Greencastle Councilman Jim Farley opposes this view:

“It doesn't look like it would be advantageous to our town, even given the fact that we would bring some money in, but it would probably cost us with maintaining good order and discipline or managing it and so on,” he claimed.