Rhode Island Restriction on Gambling, Question 2 (2014)

Question 2 Type Constitutional amendment Topic Gambling Status Approved a

2014 measures November 4 Question 1 d Question 2 a Question 3 d Question 4 a Question 5 a Question 6 a Question 7 a Polls

The Rhode Island Restriction on Gambling, Question 2 was on the November 4, 2014 ballot in Rhode Island as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved. The measure was designed to prohibit any changes in location of gambling in a city or town without further approval of the majority of electors. The purpose of the question was to ensure that the Newport Grand casino could not move from its current location unless the move was approved by voters via referendum.

The measure was sponsored by President of the Senate M. Teresa Paiva Weed (D-13) and Representative Marvin Abney (D-73) as House Bill 8265.

Election results

Below are the official, certified election results:

Rhode Island Question 2
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		200,961	67.6%
No		96,491	32.4%

Election results via: Rhode Island Board of Elections

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot question appeared as follows:

“

”

Ballot summary

The following was the ballot summary found in the voter's guide, minus the constitutional changes:

“

In 1994 the Constitution of Rhode Island was amended to add Section 22 of Article VI to provide that no act expanding the types of gambling permitted within the State or within any city or town therein or expanding the municipalities in which a particular form of gambling is authorized can take effect until it has been approved by a majority of statewide electors voting in a statewide referendum and by the majority of those electors voting in a referendum in the municipality where the proposed gambling would be allowed. The General Assembly has proposed by joint resolution an amendment to Section 22 of Article VI of the Constitution in accordance with the provisions of Section 1 of Article XIV of the Constitution for approval by the State’s electors. If approved, the proposed amendment to the Constitution referenced below will have the effect of providing that no change in the location of gambling permitted in a municipality would occur without the further approval of the majority of those electors voting on said proposed location change in a referendum within said municipality... The words and phrases in the proposed amendment to the Constitution set forth above that have been crossed- out are words and phrases currently found in Section 22 of Article VI of the Constitution that would be removed by the amendment. The words and phrases in the proposed amendment to the Constitution set forth above that have been underlined are words and phrases that are not currently found in Section 22 of Article VI of the Constitution that would be added by the amendment. The approval of the act authorizing the facility known as “Newport Grand” in the City of Newport to add state- operated casino gaming, such as table games, to the types of gambling offered as provided for by Question 1 in the statewide referendum can only take place if, in addition to approval of such Question 1 by a majority of those electors voting statewide and those electors voting in the City of Newport, a majority of those electors voting statewide also approve this Question 2 in the statewide referendum being voted upon in the general election to be held in November 2014. A vote to “Approve” means that no change in location of gambling permitted in a city or town by approval of a referendum in such city or town on or after November 4, 2014 would occur without the further approval of the majority of those electors voting on said proposed location change in a referendum within said city or town. A vote to “Reject” means that a change in location of gambling permitted in a city or town would occur without the further approval of the majority of those electors voting on said proposed location change in a referendum within said city or town.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Article VI, Rhode Island Constitution

Question 2 amended Section 22 of Article VI of the Rhode Island Constitution:

Section 22. Restrictions of Gambling

No act expanding the types or locations of gambling which are permitted within the state or within any city or town therein or expanding the municipalities in which a particular form of gambling is authorized shall take effect until it has been approved by the majority of those electors voting in a statewide referendum and by the majority of those electors voting in a referendum in the municipality in which the proposed gambling would be allowed and, having been so approved in said referendum in any city or town on or after November 4, 2014, the location where the gambling is permitted in any city or town shall not be changed within said city or town without the approval of the majority of those electors voting on said proposed change in a referendum in said city or town.

The secretary of state shall certify the results of the statewide referendum and the local board of canvassers of the city or town where the gambling is to be allowed shall certify the results of the local referendum to the secretary of state.

Support

Jobs for Newport led the campaign in support of Question 2 and Question 1.

HB 8265 "Yes" votes

The following members of the Rhode Island General Assembly voted in favor of placing this measure on the ballot.

Note: A yes vote on HB 8265 merely referred the question to voters and did not necessarily mean these legislators approved of the stipulations laid out in Question 2.

House

The following representatives voted in favor of HB 8265:

• Marvin Abney (D-73)
• Mia Ackerman (D-45)
• Edith Ajello (D-1)
• Joseph Almeida (D-12)
• Gregg Amore (D-65)
• Samuel Azzinaro (D-37)
• David Bennett (D-20)
• Christopher Blazejewski (D-2)
• Dennis Canario (D-71)
• John Carnevale (D-13)
• Stephen Casey (D-50)
• Maria Cimini (D-7)
• Elaine Coderre (D-60)
• Arthur Corvese (D-55)
• Doreen Costa (R-31)
• Gregory Costantino (D-44)
• Robert Craven (D-32)
• John DeSimone (D-5)
• Grace Diaz (D-11)
• Spencer Dickinson (D-35)
• John Edwards (D-70)
• Frank Ferri (D-22)
• Linda Finn (D-72)
• Raymond Gallison, Jr. (D-69)
• Antonio Giarrusso (R-30)
• Scott Guthrie (D-28)
• Arthur Handy (D-18)
• Raymond Hull (D-6)
• Raymond Johnston Jr. (D-61)
• Katherine Kazarian (D-63)
• Cale Keable (D-47)
• Brian Patrick Kennedy (D-38)
• Charlene Lima (D-14)
• Michael Marcello (D-41)
• Kenneth Marshall (D-68)
• Peter Martin (D-75)
• Nicholas Mattiello (D-15)
• James McLaughlin (D-57)
• Joseph McNamara (D-19)
• Helio Melo (D-64)
• Mary Messier (D-62)
• Patricia Morgan (R-26)
• Michael Morin (D-49)
• Eileen Naughton (D-21)
• Jared Nunes (D-25)
• William O'Brien (D-54)
• Jeremiah O'Grady (D-46)
• Thomas Palangio (D-3)
• Peter Palumbo (D-16)
• Robert Phillips (D-51)
• Deborah Ruggiero (D-74)
• Patricia Serpa (D-27)
• K. Joseph Shekarchi (D-23)
• Agostinho Silva (D-56)
• Scott Slater (D-10)
• Teresa Tanzi (D-34)
• Lisa Tomasso (D-29)
• Joseph Trillo (R-24)
• Stephen Ucci (D-42)
• Larry Valencia (D-39)
• Donna Walsh (D-36)
• Anastasia Williams (D-9)
• Thomas Winfield (D-53)

Senate

The following senators voted in favor of HB 8265:

• Dennis Algiere (R-38)
• David Bates (R-32)
• William Conley (D-18)
• Elizabeth Crowley (D-16)
• Louis DiPalma (D-12)
• Hanna Gallo (D-27)
• Gayle Goldin (D-3)
• Maryellen Goodwin (D-1)
• Dawson Hodgson (R-35)
• Paul Jabour (D-4)
• Nicholas Kettle (R-21)
• Frank Lombardi (D-26)
• Frank Lombardo III (D-25)
• Erin Lynch (D-31)
• Harold Metts (D-6)
• Joshua Miller (D-28)
• Donna Nesselbush (D-15)
• Christopher Ottiano (R-11)
• Ryan Pearson (D-19)
• Roger Picard (D-20)
• Juan Pichardo (D-2)
• Dominick Ruggerio (D-4)
• Adam Satchell (D-9)
• V. Susan Sosnowski (D-37)
• M. Teresa Paiva Weed (D-13)

Opposition

Citizens Concerned About Casino Gambling (CCACG) led the campaign against Question 2 and Question 1.

HB 8265 "No" votes

The following members of the Rhode Island General Assembly voted against placing this measure on the ballot.

Note: A no vote on HB 8265 meant that a legislator did not want to refer the question to voters and did not necessarily mean these legislators disapproved of the stipulations laid out in Question 2.

House

• Leonidas Raptakis (D-33) was the sole representative to vote against placing the issue on the ballot.

Senate

• Brian Newberry (R-48) was the sole senator to vote against placing the issue on the ballot.

Path to the ballot

Question 2 was introduced into the Rhode Island Legislature as House Bill 8265. The bill was a joint resolution to approve, publish and submit to electors a proposition of an amendment to the Rhode Island Constitution about gambling restrictions. The bill was approved concurrently in the Rhode Island House of Representatives and the Rhode Island Senate on June 21, 2014.

House vote

June 21, 2014 House vote

Rhode Island HB 8265 House Vote
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		63	98.44%
No		1	1.56%

Senate vote

June 21, 2014 Senate vote

Rhode Island HB 8265 Senate Vote
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		25	96.15%
No		1	3.85%

See also

Suggest a link

• Rhode Island 2014 ballot measures
• 2014 ballot measures
• List of Rhode Island ballot measures

External links

Basic information

• Rhode Island Voter Information Handbook 2014

Support

• Jobs for Newport
• Jobs for Newport Facebook
• Jobs for Newport Twitter

Opposition

• Citizens Concerned About Casino Gambling
• Citizens Concerned About Casino Gambling Facebook
• Citizens Concerned About Casino Gambling Twitter