Even after the State Supreme Court has struck down the $10 million casino host fee as unconstitutional, casinos across the State of Pennsylvania have begun to cut deals to make sure their host communities still get the money they’ve been using to fund police, fire and even homeless shelters. With majority of the casinos falling in line with the host fees Sands Casino in Bethlehem will not be among them at least not anytime soon. However The Parx Casino in Bensalem has already announced that it will continue to give its host communities their casino fess in 2017 irrespective of whether state legislators can keep their promise to restore the host fee before the agreement ends in January, In addition to this now Parx Casino has joined gambling halls in Harrah’s in Chester, Hollywood in Dauphin County and Rivers in Pittsburgh who also have agreed to pay the host fee to their local communities.
Sands officials met Bethlehem Mayor Robert Donchez last week and told him that they are going to take their cue from state legislators, who tried and failed to tackle the host fee issue before they went on a break in November. With this wait and see approach the city will be on rolling the dice on when, or if, it will get money equivalent to the pay for 100 police officers. Ron Reese, spokesman for Las Vegas Sands Corp which owns the Bethlehem gambling hall said “We’re not going to speculate on any future outcome by the Legislature,” “As it unfolds, we’ll follow and act accordingly.”
In this context Rivers Casino General Manager Craig Clark told the newspaper that “To reinforce Rivers Casino’s strong commitment to our hometown, we have worked collaboratively with city officials to ensure $10 million in annual local share payments from Rivers Casino to Pittsburgh will continue uninterrupted through 2017.”
“A flat $10 million requirement with no reference to an alternative percentage payment would seem to treat all casinos the same,” they add, “but it appears from notes in the Supreme Court decision that (the court) disagreed with the Department of Revenue’s argument that the host fee was more like an excise or privilege tax.”
“For whatever time the fee is in limbo there can be no required payment as it is doubtful the fee can be levied retroactively,” they remind. “Thus, some urgency by the General Assembly is needed.”
