Opinion ID: 6109824
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Lack of Definitions and Misleading Terms

Text: Petitioners argue that the ballot title fails to define key terms for the voter and that certain terms are misleading. They first argue that of the eleven terms defined in the amendment's text, only two-casino gaming and net casino-gaming receipts-are defined in the ballot title. Our court has disapproved of undefined  terms in a ballot title that are highly technical, obscure, that attempt to mislead voters, or that hide the actual nature of the proposal. See Christian Civic Action Comm. v. McCuen , 318 Ark. 241 , 884 S.W.2d 605 (1994). However, a term's definition need not appear in the ballot title if it is readily understandable. See id. We have previously held that terms such as state lottery, charitable bingo game, and charitable raffle do not require a definition. Id. ; see also Cox v. Daniels , 374 Ark. 437 , 288 S.W.3d 591 (2008) (holding that omitting a definition of state lottery did not make the ballot title misleading or insufficient). Here, the terms that the petitioners object to being undefined in the ballot title include casino, franchise holder, intoxicating liquor, net casino gaming receipts, sporting events, and wholesaler. We do not find these terms obscure or highly technical. They do not require definitions in order for voters to understand this amendment's scope and import; therefore, voters are not misled by their omission. Similarly, petitioners claim that the term casino gaming is incomplete and misleading because it fails to state that lotteries are excluded from the definition. However, casino gaming is defined in the ballot title as gambling with cards, dice, equipment, or any mechanical, electromechanical, or electronic device or machine ... as well as accepting wagers on sporting events. This mirrors the definition contained in the amendment, and we find it to be a common appellation. In Parker , we concluded that voters could readily understand terms such as state lottery and casino gambling. 326 Ark. 123 , 930 S.W.2d 322 . Likewise, because we assume that voters can readily differentiate these two terms, we find that voters will not be misled. Again, a ballot title is not required to include every detail, term, definition, or how the law may work. Cox v. Martin , 2012 Ark. 352 , at 9, 423 S.W.3d 75 , 83. Finally, as in the popular-name challenge, petitioners argue that the ballot title is misleading because it states that the Commission is required to issue four casino licenses. Certainly, the amendment places requirements on casino applicants in Pope and Jefferson Counties that, if not met, could result in the Commission's not issuing four licenses. We reject this argument because the ballot title explains this process and the requirements for applicants, and voters generally understand that the issuance of a license is contingent upon the applicant's satisfying those requirements.