Challenge to casino referendum dismissed

ALBANY -- A judge yesterday dismissed a legal challenge to the rewording of a referendum on Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo's proposal to authorize seven more casinos in New York, a move that outraged good-government advocates as an attempt to dupe voters into approving the measure.

Acting Supreme Court Justice Richard Platkin ruled that Brooklyn lawyer Eric Snyder's lawsuit was filed too late and lacked legal merit. Snyder vowed to appeal to the state Appellate Division.

Snyder argued that the lawsuit was filed beyond a 14-day statute of limitations only because the state didn't post its unexpected rewording of the referendum until days after the deadline to sue.

Snyder contested the language of the Nov. 5 ballot proposition, claiming it was biased in favor of approval. It was reworded by the Cuomo administration and legislative leaders to promise benefits including jobs, lower taxes and school aid without mentioning any potential downside to casinos, including problem gambling and crime.

The referendum was then adopted July 29 by the state Board of Elections in a meeting that never identified the specific additions.

The board posted the rewording on its website Aug. 23, days after the deadline to file a legal challenge to the language. The rewording didn't become widely known until news articles publicized it Sept. 12.

The judge's decision echoes the state Board of Elections argument that the referendum doesn't constitute illegal advocacy for a "yes" vote.

Platkin also dismissed Snyder's argument that the referendum's wording was altered in secret outside the public meeting.