Published: September 11, 2008 10:52 pm      

Gaming to be on ballot in Greenbrier

LEWISBURG — Voters in Greenbrier County will once again decide whether gambling will be permitted at the world-famous, four-star Greenbrier resort, despite one question that remained unanswered Thursday.

Is The Greenbrier for it or against it?

After a presentation by hotel union spokesman Peter Bostic, the Greenbrier County Commission unanimously agreed Thursday to place a special referendum on gaming on the Nov. 4 ballot. In 2000, voters defeated the same proposal despite a million-dollar advertising campaign waged by the resort.

Bostic was accompanied by several other union officials representing the 1,100 or so union workers at the White Sulphur Springs resort, all of whom were in agreement that gaming could be the answer to the current labor dispute which has dragged on for more than eight months.

“We are talking about saving a company that has been in business in this county for over 150 years, and we are talking about saving our current jobs,” Bostic told Commissioners Lowell Rose, Betty Crookshanks and Brad Tuckwiller. “That’s how dire the situation is. We are essentially asking you to help us save our jobs.”

Earlier in the week, Bostic told commissioners the resort lost $39.4 million between 2003 and 2006, and negotiators for the hotel have used those numbers to justify changes in a new union contract. During that same period, revenue for the resort totaled about $424 million, according to documents obtained by The Register-Herald. Also, the detailed financial documents indicated yearly revenues for the resort ranged from a low of $101.8 million in 2004 to high of $109.7 million in 2006.

In June, resort officials issued a statement saying they could “no longer afford” to pay full-time benefits for part-time workers.”

“The Greenbrier can no longer afford these benefits. These costs severely impact our ability to operate in an efficient and financially responsible manner as well as remain competitive,” the statement said.

Bostic on Thursday said union officials decided to be proactive rather than sit back and “lose our jobs.” Gaming would provide the revenue the resort needs to maintain its current salary packages, he said.

Several top conference clients have canceled meetings with the resort this year due to the labor dispute, which resort officials said caused the loss of a “significant amount of revenue.” The hotel’s five-year contract with the union expired in January; later, a “no strike, no lockout” agreement was reached, brokered by Gov. Joe Manchin.

“Our position is this: While we feel the current management of the property, a lot of which come from other areas of the country and are not natives of Greenbrier County, if they are not going to take action to save themselves and our jobs, then we are going to,” Bostic said.

“And we’re providing them the opportunity to do it. The current management has stated publicly in the press they are short of revenue and we are certain that this would bring revenue into the company, but we are not going to stand around and wait for their initiatives.”

Bostic cited a 2000 study which indicated gambling at The Greenbrier could stimulate “about $34 million of economic activity per year” for the county. All eight county municipalities, as well as the state, would receive tax revenue from the resort, he said.

Prior to the vote, Tuckwiller said he phoned Greenbrier President Andrew Fogarty to see what his take was on the gaming issue, but Tuckwiller described the conversation as “frustrating.”

“I placed a call (Wednesday) to Andrew Fogarty, but his comment was that the resort ‘has no comment,’’’ Tuckwiller said. Tuckwiller attended Thursday’s meeting via a speaker phone due to outside commitments. “I could not gain a clue as to whether or not they are in favor of gaming. The only expansion upon his no comment was that it was not intended to be taken ‘for or against’ the issue. I was real frustrated by that.”

When reached by phone Thursday, Lynn Swann, the resort’s director of public relations, also said “no comment” in regard to the commission placing the gaming issue on November’s general election ballot.

- - -

Meanwhile, the Rev. Youel Altizer, who opposed the same gaming initiative placed before voters in 2000, had similar questions he wanted answered. In 2000, county voters defeated the gaming proposal by a margin of 58 to 42 percent.

“Why has the union brought this before the county commission without The Greenbrier being part of this?” Altizer asked. “I would like to know what The Greenbrier wants.”

Crookshanks asked Bostic if resort officials had contacted the union about the issue.

“Not to my knowledge,” Bostic replied.

Crookshanks said she voted against gaming in 2000, but voted for the issue to be placed on the 2008 ballot “so the people could decide.”

Bostic later said the gaming issue was “not talked about” by either side during any of the previous labor talks.

Rose and Tuckwiller used similar arguments on why the issue should be decided by county voters, with Tuckwiller adding, “It’s the democratic way.”

The issue was researched for any legal roadblocks by Greenbrier Prosecuting Attorney Kevin Hanson, Rose said.

“There’s nothing to prevent us from placing the gaming issue on the ballot,” Rose added.

State Lottery spokeswoman Nancy Bulla said Thursday the agency “will certainly do as the voters dictate or ask us to do,” The Associated Press reported.

- - -

Why would voters react any differently in 2008 than they did in 2000? Because it’s a different world now, Bostic told commissioners.

“It’s a whole different argument than in 2000. Last time the issue was about creating jobs; this time the issue is about saving jobs,” Bostic said. “I don’t want to mislead people. The company has not said they would be forced to close their doors, but a business can’t continue losing money and stay in business. The need for revenue for The Greenbrier to survive, I believe, is real.”

— E-mail: cgiggenbach@register-herald.com