4/7/2010
Letter to the Editor on HB194

April 7, 2010

Letters to the Editor
New Journal

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In response to a recent news story and related editorial that reported I “switched” my vote on the question of additional gaming venues in Delaware, I’d like to set the record straight on this significant issue facing the General Assembly.

First, and perhaps most importantly, I did not “switch” my vote because there has never been a vote on HB194.  In fact, neither HB194 nor any of its various amendments have ever had a public legislative committee meeting or vote of any kind.

Second, the bill that Rep. Schwartkopf introduced last June is not the bill that we were going to vote on.  There are currently 10 amendments pending on HB194, including one (HA 5 offered by Rep. Schwartzkopf) that would entirely re-write it.  More amendments may be filed in the future or introduced from the floor.  What the final proposal is at this point is far from certain, but the amendment offered by Rep. Schwartzkopf clearly and significantly changes the original proposal. 

If Delaware is going to add venues it should be done, in my opinion, via an open and competitive bidding process that includes an explicit license fee.  The editorial board and I appear to agree on this broad approach to the issue.  Other factors in selecting sites should and certainly will be taken into consideration but as part of an application process that is open and competitive.

In my opinion, the process should not favor, prohibit or exclude any geographic area.  HA5 to HB194 requires that one of the two locations under consideration be located in the city of Wilmington.  I'm not insisting that the location not be in Wilmington, but I understand that numerous Wilmington legislators won't support a bill that even creates the possibility of locations elsewhere in New Castle County.  While a committee is proposed to pick the location, the make-up of the committee can lead one to easily conclude that the site selection is a foregone conclusion.

In my opinion, the process should not favor or direct construction contracts to union organizations over non-union organizations.  While not explicitly in the legislation, votes are being “courted and counted” by mandating that construction work be restricted to companies that have collective bargaining agreements in place.

This is a complex and moving legislative proposal that raises many significant questions beyond site selection.  As it has been since the dawn of democracy, a bill’s sponsor will gain some votes and lose others with various changes and amendments to his or her proposal.  After the proposal is clear and certain, the real counting – and any related switching – can begin.

Sincerely yours,

Greg Lavelle
State Representative
11th District

Back to the News Summary

Have news? Please contact me!