Watching Reason Prevail

Kitchener councillors unanimously oppose casino

Mayor and all 10 councillors tell CBC News they don't want a casino

By Matthew Kang and Mike McCulloch, CBC News

Posted: May 10, 2013

 

Kitchener council is all but certain of rejecting a casino within city limits when it votes on the matter Monday, according to a survey of councillors conducted by CBC News.

CBC News contacted the mayor and all 10 city councillors to ask if they would support or reject the idea of hosting a casino. All of them said they would be voting against being a host city.

Ward 7 councillor Bil Ioannidis said the results of the public online casino survey, which were overwhelmingly opposed to a casino, helped him reach a final decision.

“The survey confirms everything that I was expecting,” said Ioannidis. “I’ll be voting no for sure.”
Ward 4 councillor Yvonne Fernandes says she recognized the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation’s top priority is to make money.

“Sometimes it’s to the benefit of people and sometimes it’s not,” said Fernandes. “I think in this case, it’s not to the benefit of our average citizen.”

Ward 3 councillor John Gazzola told CBC News that he tried at first to keep an open mind on the financial benefits of a casino, but eventually decided he will vote against building one.

“I did a lot of investigation and I found it’s going to pull out a lot more money out of our area than it would ever bring in,” said Gazzola.

The official vote will take place at Kitchener City Hall on Monday at 7:00 p.m.

The motion on the casino also includes a recommendation that council ask Woolwich Township to abandon its plans to attract a casino.

"From my point of view it's basically saying, 'You guys didn't get it right so we want you to think about it again,'" Woolwich Township Mayor Todd Cowan told Craig Norris on The Morning Edition Friday about the recommendation.

"We looked at all sides, we invited a number of delegations pro and con to come to our council meetings. We had three public meetings, plus we had a lot of staff time that had gone into looking at studies, Canadian gambling studies. I think that we did a very thorough job," he added.

"I don't think we made a quick decision, I think we made a very thoughtful, educated decision," said Cowan.

Councillors will also vote on another recommendation to ask the province to change its rules on the casino allocation process so that consent from both lower- and upper-tier municipalities is required in order to continue with the process.

The OLG said Thursday it will review the process in response to requests by Premier Kathleen Wynne and now Finance Minister Charles Sousa to do so.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/story/2013/05/09/unanimous-opposition-to-casino-expected-by-kitchener-city-council.html

All Kitchener councillors to vote 'no' on proposed casino
Waterloo Record
The overwhelming majority of people who spoke at two public meetings were against a casino and city councillors cite that opposition as a major reason for their no votes. “It is not a good deal,” Coun. John Gazzola said. “I have done a lot of reading ...

Toronto Casino Opposition.....

With the Toronto casino issue looming for the city of Toronto, some neighbourhoods in the city have seen anti-casino signs popping up on front lawns such as these ones on Spencer Ave. in the Parkdale area. Spencer Ave. is a few blocks away from the CNE site where MGM has proposed building their casino. (Fred Lum/The Globe and Mail)

Casino opposition backs off from plans for special meeting

Elizabeth Church

The Globe and Mail

PublishedWednesday, May. 08 2013,

 

A group of anti-casino city councillors have backed off – at least for now – on plans to put the controversial question of whether Toronto wants a gambling complex in the downtown on the council floor during this week’s meeting.

The group was one name short of the 23 needed to call a special casino meeting for Thursday, but when council began at 9:30 Wednesday they held the balance of power – all that they needed to do was add the casino debate to the regular agenda of council.

 

Casino$100-million casino fee for Toronto unlikely, sources say

 

Mayor Rob Ford and his brother Councillor Doug Ford were both absent when council was called to order.

 

The mayor last month removed a staff report on a new downtown casino and the expansion of gambling at Woodbine Racetrack from this week’s council meeting and called a special meeting for May 21 to consider the issue. Under the rules of council, Councillor Gord Perks said all that was needed was a majority of the councillors present in the chamber to call a snap vote to have the debate during this week’s session.

 

Mr. Perks said councillors who oppose a casino decided not to take that route because the procedural manoeuvring might distract from the actual debate.

 

“We decided why give people an argument that we pulled a fast one,” he said. “Let’s just debate it on its merits. We can wait a couple weeks to do that.”

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/casino-opposition-backs-off-from-plans-for-special-meeting/article11782057/?cmpid=rss1

 

 

Cardinal Thomas Collins

Sat Apr 27 2013

Gambling can bring ‘grievous suffering’

Guelph-born archbishop of Toronto urges reflection on the proliferation of gambling in Ontario

Cardinal Thomas Collins, the Catholic archbishop of Toronto, has spoken out against bringing a casino to Toronto in a new pastoral letter being distributed in the Toronto archdiocese this weekend.

Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

(Editor’s note: This pastoral letter by Guelph-born Cardinal Thomas Collins, the archbishop of Toronto, is being distributed to 225 parishes in the Toronto archdiocese this weekend. The city of Kitchener is holding a second public meeting Tuesday for input into whether the city should accept or reject a casino for the city.)

In my years of pastoral ministry as priest and bishop, I have become sadly aware of the grievous suffering experienced by individuals and families because of gambling dependence.

We are now engaged in debating plans for an expansion of casinos in Ontario, including a major new one in the Toronto area, so I am writing to offer pastoral guidance to our Catholic community.
This current discussion is an appropriate occasion for each of us to reflect more deeply upon the effects of gambling in our community.

In recent years, governments have more and more used gambling to increase tax revenue, proposing as well that gambling benefits the economy. It is understandable that governments are tempted by the prospect of what seems to be an easy way to do that. Even if there were significant long-term economic benefits, however, and that is far from clear, the establishment of a new casino in Toronto will have a negative social impact that outweighs such benefits, and will have an adverse effect on the vitality and social health of our community.

It is sometimes argued that yet another casino could be a source of employment and would attract visitors and tourists. That approach is short-sighted. We need to consider the overall effects of the expansion of gambling. I recommend that you read the Jan. 28 report of the city’s medical officer of health, Community Health Impacts of a Casino in Toronto, which concludes that “with respect to all other potential impacts, the available evidence indicates that the introduction of a new casino is likely to have greater adverse health-related impacts than beneficial impacts.”

I am particularly concerned that marriages and families will be hurt or even destroyed through greater ease of access to gambling through the construction of yet another large casino. The health of families is a constant concern of our Catholic Family Services and of Catholic Charities member agencies throughout the archdiocese. In our parishes as well we seek to strengthen families, and we directly deal with the suffering that gambling addiction causes to individuals and families. We seek to heal, and are concerned by the expansion of the capacity to harm.

Licensed gambling is undeniably legal, and in fact is being heavily promoted by the government. In view of the suffering that gambling can cause, however, it is important to consider what light both our Christian faith and reason shed on the moral issues related to it.

Occasional and small-scale gambling can be a legitimate form of entertainment, and is not inherently evil. The catechism of the Catholic Church, in the section relating to respect for persons and their goods, states that games of chance or wagers are not in themselves contrary to justice, but become morally unacceptable when these activities deprive people of what is necessary to provide for their needs and those of others. That, unfortunately, is what happens far too often. The catechism also notes the power of gambling to enslave.

Individuals, and the government, and charitable organizations as well can become enslaved by the lure of easy gambling revenue, and that is clearly not healthy.

The Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario has consistently raised concerns about the proliferation of gambling, advising governments to take a more cautious approach toward promoting this source of income. These concerns have heightened as gambling has grown over the past 30 years to become a basic source of government revenue in the province.

Gambling is inherently based on illusion — on promoting the fantasy, particularly attractive to the most vulnerable and the most desperate, that it is an easy way to provide a quick solution to the financial problems that they face. That is a cruel illusion, and it is not wholesome for governments to promote it, especially through extensive advertising.

It is sometimes said that should anyone become addicted, gambling’s proceeds can be used to treat their addiction. Apart from the fact that this is rather dubious logic, as it makes more sense not to cause the problem in the first place, problem gambling is a serious public health concern. There is evidence that a significant amount of revenue is derived from people who are most vulnerable to gambling.

When gambling is so extensively available, and is so aggressively promoted, it is also very difficult to protect our young people from viewing gambling as a worthwhile activity, whose negative effects are masked.

As we consider this important issue in the civil society in which we all live and participate as citizens, we should also look carefully at whether we as a Church are also caught up in an unhealthy dependence on gambling that can harm others. I ask all Catholic organizations to examine any connection which they might have with gambling as a source of revenue. If we are engaged in any form of gambling that is likely to cause harm, we should find alternatives as soon as possible. We must not fund our good works in ways that cause suffering to others.

As a Catholic community, we should ponder carefully the proposals before our elected officials and add informed commentary to the discussion. Is yet another major casino a truly wholesome development that enhances the quality of life in our community? Does even more gambling make for a better society for individuals and for families? Can we support the further extension of a reality which already causes significant harm to the most vulnerable among us?

Cardinal Thomas Collins is the archbishop of Toronto.

http://www.therecord.com/opinion/columns/article/924598--gambling-can-bring-grievous-suffering

No Toronto Casino!

No Casino Toronto

SCARBOROUGH: Do you live in one of these wards? Your councillor is undecided about casinos in Toronto. Sign the No Casino Toronto petition http://goo.gl/4eA4n to send them an email instantly urging them to SAY NO to a mega casino in Toronto. Tell your friends and family to do the same!

 

 

 

 

Casinos: Costs exceed Benefits

David Frum: A fork at the centre of the universe

Reprints

Republish Online

Republish Offline

David Frum | 13/04/20

The city of Toronto faces two hugely important decisions about its future — whether to build a new casino and expand the island airport in the heart of the city. I’d vote “nay” on the first and “aye” on the second.

Richard Florida has argued the case against the casino powerfully in the Huffington Post: “Virtually every serious study that has ever been done of the economic impacts of casinos shows that their costs far exceed their benefits and that they are a poor use of precious downtown land. A downtown casino will tear holes in Toronto’s urban fabric, create more costs than benefits, and as surely as if it’s holding up a giant sign, will send the message that Toronto is on the wrong track.”

I’d add another objection: Casinos have a bad way of introducing corruption into city government. Casinos are to cities as oil is to national governments: a windfall of cash that voters pay less attention to than other sources of government revenue. As Detroit learned the hard way, casinos can lead to unfavourable outcomes. According to a March 22 report in the Detroit News:

“Greektown mogul Jim Papas allegedly bribed two city officials with $20,000 worth of casino chips while pursuing pension-fund deals for himself and others worth millions, according to a federal indictment, city records and sources familiar with the investigation. The revelation sheds light on the source of payments, [which are] described as bribes that are part of an alleged conspiracy that federal prosecutors say cost Detroit pension funds more than $84-million.”

Toronto may be less vulnerable to outright fraud than the notoriously poorly governed city of Detroit. But once the casino industry gets a foothold in the city, Torontonians should certainly expect their own local version of what’s going on right now in Cedar Rapids, Iowa: “The dueling pro- and anti-casino campaigns have spent $2.2-million to date to get their messages out before Tuesday’s vote on casino gaming in Linn County.”

The so-called “anti-casino” camp in Iowa actually represents competing casinos two counties away, which are trying to shut down the competition before it opens. Casinos may begin as creatures of politics, but they end up being the paymasters of politicians. Saying “no” is a crucial prophylactic for cities that aspire to keep their politics clean.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/04/20/david-frum/



In the comments:

John Atticus Truenorth 1960•17 hours ago

 

"The Richard Florida piece is an academic joke."
Why?
Analysis of the casino proposals by Rothman's Martin Prosperity Institute at U of T pretty much came to the same conclusion:
http://martinprosperity.org/media/TO-Casino-Econ-Impact_v02.pdf
Casinos do more harm than good to the greater economy and social fabric of a city. And they don't actually generate that much revenue into city coffers anyways.

From the sounds of it you seem to think these critiques are wrong simply because they go against what Rob Ford thinks about the issue.

Just who exactly is on the "pro-casino" side saying this is a great idea? Other than Ford, the OLG, and casino industry?

 

Denying Increased Crime

Ever notice that when Proponents, the Casino KoolAid consumers, want to justify Predatory Gambling, they deny the INCREASED CRIME even when statistics prove otherwise?

Toronto casino: In 2001 crime was a concern at Woodbine. Has anything changed?

After slot machines came to Woodbine in 2000, police warned about crime. Today, as council ponders approving a large casino, the message has changed.

 

By:Paul MoloneyCity Hall Bureau reporter, Published on Fri Apr 19 2013

 

Slot machines had been operating less than a year at Woodbine racetrack when Toronto police asked city council to fund an extra 18 officers to handle the increased workload.
 

“The historical information indicates that gaming facilities can generate social and crime issues in a community,” the police said then, even quoting Donald Trump that gambling brings crime.

In explaining the 2001 request for council to fund more officers, police managers said the racetrack area saw a 29 per cent hike in violent crime to 162 incidents in 2000 versus 126 the previous year. Property crime rose to 755 incidents in 2000 from 651 in 1999.

Police said the introduction of 1,700 slot machines in March, 2000 — later increased to 3,000 machines — was a “contributing factor” in the spike.
 

Fast forward to today, with Mayor Rob Ford’s administration pushing hard for a large casino in the city with perhaps 1,500 slots and 400 table games, and the message has changed.

Chief Bill Blair, at the request of the city manager, appeared before council’s executive committee chaired by the mayor to say crime at Woodbine hasn’t gone up appreciably since the slots arrived.
 

“There’s no statistical trend that indicates there’s been an increase in either violent criminal activity or property criminal activity in that area over that period of time,” Blair said.

Blair dismissed one estimate given to the executive committee that a large casino, now under consideration, could mean $50 million to $100 million in annual policing costs.

Toronto now has had 13 years of experience with Woodbine slots — one of the busiest gaming floors in North America — and police report few problems, said Rod Phillips, president of the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp.

“In fact, many police chiefs will say that the facilities we run are among the safest because of the security that’s there, because of the surveillance that’s there,” Phillips said. [This is INSIDE the Gambling Facility.]

“So I think Chief Blair’s contribution was probably just reflecting that same experience here in Toronto.”

What does it mean if Toronto — or another GTA municipality — approves a casino? Will crime rates climb?

Hard to say and it depends on who you ask.
 

Toronto Councillor Joe Mihevc, who pressed Blair on the point at the committee hearing, said he thinks a large casino will bring crime problems.
 

“I believe that and I think most Torontonians would believe that,” Mihevc said. “It’s not a belief based on nothing, it’s based on friends and family members who’ve gotten involved in gambling, sometimes over their heads, and have done things that are illegal.
 

“And they wouldn’t have done those things if they weren’t struggling with this addiction.”

Councillor Peter Milczyn, a Ford ally who represents an Etobicoke ward, said Woodbine has not been a problem.
 

“Over the years, I’ve never heard anybody, police or residents or businesses, raise any concerns that there is any particular criminal activity associated in or around Woodbine,” Milczyn said.

The request for extra police was mainly due to the fact that the slots attract thousands of players every day, and extra police are needed as they would be wherever large crowds gather, he said.
 

Blair agreed, in his presentation to the executive committee.
 

“I might anticipate that if we were going to have any kind of public venue in Toronto that would attract a large number of people, it could have an impact on policing costs for that location,” the chief said.

The earlier request for extra officers for Woodbine said examples of police calls include medical complaints, unwanted guests, accidents, persons wanted, thefts and impaired driving.
 

Blair said he hasn’t been asked to report on the cost of policing a large casino, but he couldn’t provide even a rough estimate at this point.

“We have no sense at this time of scale or scope or location and so I don’t have anything on the back of an envelope,” he said. “I think we’d be reluctant to pull a number out of the air and it would just be a number pulled from the air.”

The executive committee voted 9-4 to tell Ontario Lottery and Gaming that the city is interested in the casino opportunity. Council is to decide whether to grant conditional consent next month.
 

City manager Joe Pennachetti said a report on policing costs would be available before council makes a final decision late this year or early 2014.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/04/19/toronto_casino_in_2001_crime_was_a_concern_at_woodbine_has_anything_changed.html

18 extra police officers needed at Woodbine after slot machines added

 

(Curtis Lantinga)
MARGARET WENTE

Dead man’s hand: Just say no to casinos

The Globe and Mail (includes correction)
Published Thursday, Apr. 11 2013

What could be better than a big casino in downtown Toronto? Why, it’s practically free money! Just pull the lever and hit the jackpot. Jobs and revenues and tourism dollars will rain down on us like April showers.

That’s the sales pitch, anyway. The casino lobby is furiously courting cities across North America, promising to fill their coffers by peddling a little harmless fun to the public. Toronto Mayor Rob Ford is all gung-ho. The people who run the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. can scarcely contain their excitement. Don’t be so old-fashioned. You’d have to be soft-headed to resist.

But not all is going smoothly. The casino lobby didn’t reckon with the Sikhs. Or the Jews, the Protestants, the Muslims, the Catholics, the Buddhists and the Jains. These groups usually don’t have much in common. But, last week, 250 of the city’s faith leaders got together to say No to a casino in Toronto. They don’t like the devastation that gambling brings to families and communities, and they particularly don’t like the signal that casinos send about our civic values. “This isn’t about politics,” Christopher White, the minister of Fairlawn Avenue United Church, told me. “It’s about city-building.” And, in his view, there are a lot of better ways to build a city.

Personally, I don’t mind if people gamble. If they want to throw their money down the drain, too bad for them. But I agree with Rev. White. I don’t think the government should act as their enabler.
Warren Buffett doesn’t think so, either. “It’s a terrible way to raise money,” the legendary investor, who opposed casinos in his home state of Nebraska (and won), told reporters during an annual shareholders meeting. “… It’s a tax on ignorance. I don’t like the idea of the government depending, for certain portions of its revenue, on hoodwinking citizens.”

As for the business case – the 10,000 well-paying jobs, the economic development and all the rest – don’t believe it. The Rotman School of Management’s Martin Prosperity Institute studied the potential economic impact of a casino in Toronto, and its conclusions were damning: “So far, all we have are numbers – lots and lots of numbers. The important thing is that all of them are meaningless.”
Urban theorist Richard Florida, the institute’s director, has been tracking the casino craze around the world. “I call them city ruiners,” he told me. “Casinos generate a lot of social costs, and they’re a regressive form of taxation. They take money away from poor people.” They’re also the wrong message for a city to send, because they smack of desperation. Casinos aren’t for cities on their way up. They’re for cities out of options.

“Casinos are brand killers,” said Mr. Florida. “People in the outside world would say, ‘Toronto is a great city, so why are they putting a casino there?’ ”

All governments live to some extent on the avails of vice. In Ontario, the OLG (according to its annual report for fiscal 2011) extracted $6.7-billion from the public’s pockets, of which $2-billion went to provincial coffers. This money is recycled into good works, which are conspicuously advertised to show how indispensable the OLG is. Governments promote casinos as painless revenue streams that create economic development. In fact, the casino business is a rather inefficient transfer of money from middle- and lower-income groups, some of which goes to the state in taxes, some of which pays the operating expenses and some of which goes to the owners.

Thriving major cities don’t need casinos. And even minor cities have rejected them. In Surrey, B.C., a coalition of citizens, students and faith groups (including evangelicals and Sikhs) defeated a $100-million casino proposal in January, even though it was strongly backed by the provincial government.

The casino debate doesn’t split along the usual party lines. Toronto’s mayor has the construction unions on his side. On the other side is a mix of left-leaning city councillors, conservative rabbis and ordinary people who’re uneasy about a casino but aren’t quite sure why. I think I understand. They’re proud of the city, and they think we can do better.

“I think it’s cynical on the part of the state to raise money from people who basically can’t afford it by promising them a dream that is not going to come true,” Mr. Buffett told one interviewer. “The state ought to be trying to do something for its citizens, not do something to its citizens.”

Said Mr. White: “A casino is smoke and mirrors. Let’s create new business opportunities with sustainable middle-class jobs that will give people dignity. Surely we’re capable of that.”

Correction: Thursday print edition and earlier online versions of this column incorrectly attributed a quote to Berkshire Hathaway chairman Warren Buffett. In fact, the statement “The modern slot machine is one of the best ways to remove money from suckers known to man” was made by Berkshire Hathaway vice-chairman Charlie Munger.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/dead-mans-hand-just-say-no-to-casinos/article11017537/

 

Dan Gilbert: When Sucking $$$ From the Poor Isn't Enough

Dan Gilbert pitching casino for downtown Toronto

By David Muller
MLive.co
on April 12, 2013

Quicken Loans founder Dan Gilbert . (Tanya Moutzalias | MLive.com)

 

DETROIT, MI - Dan Gilbert and partners in Caesars Entertainment will pitch plans for a downtown casino in Toronto to city officials there next week, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports. Ontario officials are also considering whether or not to privatize government-owned casinos outside of Toronto, so Gilbert and company may see some opportunities there, a company spokeswoman told the Cleveland publication.

 

Gilbert, who signed off on buying majority share of downtown Detroit’s Greektown Casino-Hotel last week, is expanding his gaming holdings throughout the region.

 

He recently struck casino and horse track deals in Baltimore and northern Kentucky, and has bought a stake in Caesars’ online gaming division, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports.

 

Gilbert, the founder of Quicken Loans and owner of 4 million square feet of downtown Detroit commercial real estate, began his foray into the gaming world when he started Horseshoe casinos in Cleveland last May and in Cincinnati last month. On Tuesday, his group opened Thistledown Racino in the suburbs of Cleveland.

 

Caesars is a minority partner with Gilbert’s Rock Gaming on the Ohio gaming developments, as well as on Turfway Park, a thoroughbred track in northern Kentucky. Casino gambling is still illegal in Kentucky, but the state has been talking about its legalization.

 

http://www.mlive.com/business/detroit/index.ssf/2013/04/dan_gilbert_pitching_casino_fo.html

 

 

 

 

Faith leaders unite to oppose Toronto casino

Faith leaders unite to oppose Toronto casino

Frances Kraft, Staff Reporter, Monday, April 8, 2013

Rabbi Baruch Frydman-Kohl, left, and Rev. Christopher White were among the speakers at an interfaith clergy press conference to oppose casino expansion in the GTA. [Frances Kraft photo]TORONTO — The Toronto Board of Rabbis, along with other groups of GTA faith leaders, has spoken out against the proposed Toronto casino.

Their statement, signed by more than 265 faith leaders, was released at an April 4 press conference at City Hall. It expressed opposition to the expansion of casinos proposed by the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation, and support for NoCasinoToronto.com’s anti-casino campaign.
The statement, which can be viewed online at nocasinotoronto.com (and on page 32), called on governments to “protect the most vulnerable in our society from casinos that exploit human weaknesses and addictions,” and urged others to voice their opposition to expanded gambling.

STATEMENT BY CLERGY We, the undersigned faith leaders and representatives in the Greater Toronto Area, stand united in opposing the expansion of casinos proposed by the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation and support the anti-casino campaign led by www.NoCasinoToronto.com. We represent diverse faith communities with unique perspectives, principles, sacred texts, traditions and teachings that form the basis of our opposition to expanded gambling. We are unified in our position that gambling is contrary to the ethical norms of our traditions because it negatively impacts our faith communities and the wider public. We are convinced that casinos contribute to family breakdown, depression, addiction, bankruptcies and crime, and thus are antithetical to our mission as faith traditions to strengthen individuals, families and communities. Our faith traditions teach us that our governments should maintain order, preserve justice and promote the common good. We believe that our governments must take a stand to promote the values of education, hard work, social justice and the dignity of labour, and reject the illusion of easy money, for both individuals and public coffers. Our governments should protect the most vulnerable in our society from casinos that exploit human weaknesses and addictions. We therefore call upon our governments to reject gambling expansion and reject this predatory industry as a solution to economic and fiscal problems. We strongly urge our Municipal City Councils to vote against any new casinos in the Greater Toronto Area. We further urge our brothers and sisters in our faith communities to become informed about this issue and voice their opposition to expanded gambling to our elected officials.

“We are convinced that casinos contribute to family breakdown, depression, addiction, bankruptcies and crime,” the document stated.

At the press conference, Rabbi Baruch Frydman-Kohl, president of the Toronto Board of Rabbis, said that he and his colleagues were speaking “out of deep personal experience of individuals in our community who have been affected by excessive gambling.”

He told of a congregant – a married father of three – whose family had cut him off because of his gambling.

“He left his children penniless, and he himself was on the street on Passover, because he had no place to go.”

The rabbi was one of more than half a dozen speakers including representatives of the Canadian Council of Imams, the Hindu Dharma Mission of Canada, the GTA Council of Christian Churches, the Anglican Diocese of Toronto, the Jain Society of Toronto, and the Guru Ram Das Ashram, who had signed the Interfaith Statement Opposing Casino Expansion in the Toronto Area.

Rev. Christopher White, who moderated the event, said the group objected to “the negative impact the proposed casino expansion will have on our fellow citizens and the life we all share.”

He said he “would respectfully disagree” with Mayor Rob Ford, who earlier that day had said the majority of Torontonians were in favour of a casino.

The interfaith statement was an outgrowth of a symposium in January called Faith in the City, to address areas of common social concern. Rev. White called the anti-casino initiative an “unprecedented and historic show of unity.”

Opposition to casino expansion was unanimous among the speakers, despite some differences in perspective.

In the Hindu tradition, for example, gambling is strictly forbidden, and will lead to physical, mental and spiritual suffering in this life and the next, said Pandit Suraj Persad of the Hindu Dharma Mission of Canada.

But Torah and Jewish tradition are not opposed to “casual” gambling at certain times during the year, Rabbi Frydman-Kohl said. However, he clarified, “regular and extended and ongoing” gambling is prohibited.

Bishop Philip Poole of the Anglican Diocese of Toronto noted that gambling “offers the illusion of getting something for nothing, [but] the house always wins.

“I understand that governments need to be creative in finding new sources of revenue, but casinos are not the way forward.”





http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?q=node/105135

Owning Mahowny

Gary Stephen Ross, author of Stung, is helping No Casino Toronto raise public awareness by fielding questions at a screening of Owning Mahowny, shown here. (Sony Pictures Classics/courtesy Everett Collection)

Q&A Gary Stephen Ross

‘Casinos are highly sophisticated examples of social engineering meant to separate people from their money’

MICHAEL POSNER

Special to The Globe and Mail

PublishedSaturday, Apr. 06 2013

To help raise public awareness, No Casino Toronto, the impromptu citizens’ coalition formed to fight plans for a Toronto casino, is screening Owning Mahowny at the Revue Cinema in Roncesvalles on Sunday afternoon. The 2003 film, starring Philip Seymour Hoffman, is based on writer Gary Stephen Ross’s 1987 book Stung, about a CIBC bank teller whose gambling addiction caused him to embezzle some $10-million from his employer. Mr. Ross, a former Torontonian now living in White Rock, B.C., and a strong opponent of the casino plan, will introduce the film and field questions. He spoke recently with Globe and Mail reporter Michael Posner.

What do you have against casinos?

Casinos are highly sophisticated examples of social engineering meant to separate people from their money. The people who get separated are the hopeless, the dumb and the addicted. People with brains understand that it is not about luck, but about the mathematical certainty of the way casino games are structured. If you go in there and play, more than once, you come out with less money. [Psychologist] B.F. Skinner showed that the best reinforcement schedule to optimize particular behaviour is intermittent positive reinforcement. If you are rewarded unpredictably for your behaviour, that is the best way to get creatures to repeat the behaviour.

Sounds like golf.

That’s right. From the moment you walk in, you are immersed in this other reality. It’s neither day nor night; it’s a twilight zone. You turn your money into chips because if you actually counted out $20 bills instead of putting a $500 chip in play, you would realize what you were doing.

Governments say it’s a great way to raise money.

Yes, but the money raised comes from poor people. It’s people with money selling hope to people who have little but hope.

Can’t a casino provide an otherwise innocent evening’s entertainment for people who don’t mind losing a hundred or even five hundred dollars?

It can, but that’s not where the money mainly comes from. Casinos sell the gaming experience as entertainment, as if it’s like going to a baseball game and spending a few hundred dollars. You may come out of the stadium thinking, ‘Gee, that cost me $240, for tickets, food and beer, parking, the babysitter, etc.’ So they are pricking you and taking drops of blood, but they are not, as casinos are, trying to open a vein and bleed you out.

If you have money, you are in a casino database, all of your likes and dislikes are available to everyone there, and just when you might want to leave, a nice man in a nice suit will invite you to have a complimentary dinner with a lovely companion.

Is that what happened to Brian Molony, the man on whom the film is based?

He wasn’t interested in stage shows or women, but the thrill of being in action. Compulsive gamblers get the same kind of high that drug addicts get, in terms of dopamine and norepinephrine and serotonin levels. Molony, who earned $30,000 a year, would talk about the world going into slow motion when he bet $75,000 on a single hand of baccarat, as a wave of good feeling washed over his skull. It was 10 times better than sex. It’s interesting that when Molony was tried – he ultimately served six years after his conviction for fraud – his lawyer, Edward Greenspan, was the first I think to argue that gambling addiction was an illness, not a crime. It met with some resistance from the sentencing judge at the time, but now it’s common wisdom.

Don’t casinos advise patrons to know and play within their limits?

It’s a wonderful hypocrisy. They pay lip service to the notion, by pretending not to want your money. Know your limit, but you can’t win if you’re not in.

What about the prospects for job growth and economic development that casino proponents trumpet?

These are always wildly overblown. Casino gambling, you may recall, was going to revive the fortunes of Atlantic City. Well, if you go there, you will find one strip of seemingly prosperous casinos and, one block behind it, and many blocks beyond, it’s the South Bronx.

Owning Mahowny

Board of Health Rejects Idea of Casino in Toronto

Board of Health Rejects Idea of Casino in Toronto
Posted By: Michelle Rosa
11/20/2012

More negative talk about the possibility of having a casino in Toronto.

Councillor Joe Mihevc introduced a motion that the OLG shouldn't be invited to expand gambling in Toronto and the city's Board of Health agreed.

Members voted 9 to 1 in favour of the motion and rejected the idea of a casino complex, mainly because it would lead to a rise in problem gambling and addiction.

Councillor Mihevc cited a report by the medical officer health, Dr. David McKeown, that stated a gambling facility would present far too many health risks to the GTA.

That report makes suggestsions in the event that we do get a casino such as not allowing ATM's on the gambling floor, slowing down the speed of play on slot machines, and not serving alcohol. There were ten recommendations altogether, but the Canadian Gaming Association thinks they are misguided and could even be counter-productive.

Just hours before the vote, the chief executive of Caesars Entertainment urged torontonians not to vote against a casino because of social concerns, including addiction.

http://www.newstalk1010.com/News/localnews/blogentry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10468299

 

Toronto: Ignoring Costs!

From:

Libby MitchellGambling Action Group

Check out the report on Health and Social Impacts...abysmal. Worse that it is accepted as satisfactory.

 

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2012.EX24.1

Health and Social Impacts

The Medical Officer of Health (MOH) has prepared a technical report on the public health impacts of gambling and of expanded access to gaming venues. The key findings are summarized herein. The MOH's report concludes that increasing access to gambling through any means (including a casino) is associated with an increase in the prevalence of problem gambling which presently affects 0.2% of the population. Consequently, a casino located anywhere in the GTA will likely increase health risks for Toronto residents and nearby communities.

The OLG contributes approximately $40 million annually – 2 percent of its annual slot revenues – to the provincial government's programs to fund the treatment, research, prevention and public awareness of problem gambling. The corporation additionally spent $12.9 million in 2011/12 on internal responsible gambling initiatives including staff training and self-exclusion programs. OLG works with other provincial agencies including CAMH to develop staff training, and the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre to conduct research.

Financial Impact

The City Manager will engage an external firm to develop and conduct public and stakeholder consultation using a variety of methods. The consultation process will be funded from the 2012 approved budget and no new funds are required for this purpose. As stated in this report, the consultant's analysis has outlined the significant economic and financial benefits to the City of operating a casino in Toronto. Over and above construction jobs (ranging from 3,600 to 8,500), an integrated entertainment complex could create an estimated 4,400 to 7,300 net new jobs. The project could generate net GDP in the range of $640 million and additional estimated annual property taxes of up to $27 million. Revenue from the sale or lease of City owned land could contribute additional value to the City of up to $250 million for capital purposes. Most importantly, the hosting fee could provide substantial annual revenue to the City. Estimates range from $32 million to $168 million annually depending on the type of casino complex and negotiated fee formula with OLG.

$3-billion casino plan unveiled for downtown Toronto

OXFORD PROPERTIES GROUP ILLLUSTRATION
This illustration, provided by Oxford Properties Group, shows a proposed casino development along Front St. W., in place of the current Metro Toronto Convention Centre.

Robyn Doolittle
Urban Affairs Reporter

A proposed $3 billion overhaul of the Metro Toronto Convention Centre that includes a hotel, sprawling urban park, two new office towers and a casino will generate $50 million in annual property tax revenue, plus millions more in profit-sharing, said an Oxford Properties Group official.

But a company executive warned that without a casino, the deal is dead.

“(The casino) allows us to privately fund the new convention centre and all of the new public amenities that this project includes. If the casino disappears, it’s back to the drawing board for us,” ^^^^^
Michael Kitt, the company’s executive vice president in Canada, said Friday, hours after Oxford released its proposal.

Officials at MGM and Caesars both of which have expressed interest in building an “integrated resort” in downtown Toronto, gave the plan high marks, but observers outside of the gambling world were less enthusiastic.

As the tempting details of the plan circulated at city hall — a 2.2-hectare park over the railway tracks lined with cafes and shops, three floors of Eaton Centre-like retail, a modern convention centre and ballroom, office towers likely to include residential units — councillors grappled with that one important question: is it worth it?

Even right-wing councillors have been torn over whether it’s wise to bring a casino to Toronto to raise revenue. The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. has selected the GTA as one of five sites to be awarded a new gaming facility. Downtown Toronto is the preferred site, but OLG chair Paul Godfrey says the corporation won’t force a casino on a community that doesn’t want it.

Council is expected to formally debate the issue early next year, with the vote expected to be close. So far, it seems the Oxford proposal hasn’t swayed any minds yet.

“We need to be open-minded. There are some positives …The question is: In order to get the hotel rooms, the entertainment, the restaurants, the bigger convention centre, do we need to add a casino to it? I’m not convinced yet,” said centrist Ana Bailão, who represents Davenport.

Said Parkdale Councillor Gord Perks: “It doesn’t matter how much lipstick they put on it. A casino is still a pig.”

Don Valley West Councillor Jaye Robinson, a member of the mayor’s executive committee, said she is waiting for a city staff report expected in November before making her decision.

“I know there are a lot of people on executive right now who are really struggling with this issue,” she said.

“I’m not sure I’m going to sell Toronto out in order to have a park. For me, it’s a pragmatic approach — what are the benefits to Toronto and weighing those against the cons that come with a Toronto casino.”

On Friday, Mayor Rob Ford told reporters he wants to see a casino built on municipally owned land — the Oxford property is privately owned — so the city can collect rent. Ford estimates a casino-hotel entertainment complex built at Exhibition Place or in the Port Lands could mean $100 million in annual revenue for the city.

“But if someone can come up on private land with the same amount, I’ll entertain that as well,” he told reporters.

Oxford, which is owned by the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS), thinks it can.

No matter where the casino lands, Toronto will have negotiated compensation from the OLG. The slots at Woodbine bring in $15 million annually. Since 2000, the city has received nearly $182 million from those revenues.

Kitt says that, in addition, the new office, retail and hotel businesses would generate $50 million in property tax. Two office towers that currently pay $10 million in tax would be torn down during construction, he said, but that temporary loss in revenue would be mitigated by a staggered redevelopment schedule.

Furthermore, Kitt promises a huge injection into the local economy from an enlarged and updated convention centre.

“Bottom line is: we believe the city makes more money here,” Kitt said.

It is unclear where Ford came up with the $100 million annual revenue figure. Councillor Mark Grimes, chair of the Exhibition Place board, said a lease amount has not been discussed and he couldn’t make a guess as to what it might come to.

Under Oxford’s proposal, the real estate company would handle building the hotel, retail, park and office towers. An outside bidder would be sought to work on the design and build the hotel and casino — provided the OLG approves the site.

OLG spokesperson Tony Bitonti said Toronto City Council must make its decision first. If councillors decide they want a casino, the OLG will issue a request for proposals from interested parties — which is when Oxford would be welcome to apply.

MGM initially turned away from the convention centre site as its first choice because of traffic concerns.

With files from Paul Moloney

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1270290---3-billion-casino-plan-unveiled-for-downtown-toronto

No CASINO Toronto

This from our newest friends at:
No CASINO Toronto

You're needed to help save us from a casino

Cities across the continent are being assaulted by casino developers

 

By Adam Vaughan

 

Soon, City Council will be debating allowing a mega casino to be built in Toronto and casino lobbyists have their eyes on our waterfront.

Toronto and East York Community Council wants to hear from residents about their views on the potential location of a Casino in downtown Toronto. We have scheduled a special public consultation session and I hope you can attend:

Date: Wednesday October 10, 2012
Time: 6:00 pm
Location: Council Chambers, Toronto City Hall, 100 Queen St W

To register to speak, please contact the Clerk, Ros Dyers either by email teycc@toronto.ca or phone 416-392-7033.

There are a number of impacts to locating a casino in an established community. To read the staff report follow this link.

Stand up for our city and act to stop a mega casino from being built in Toronto.
Join the No CASINO Toronto campaign!

Why am I asking you to join the campaign?

Why am asking you to come to City Hall?

Casinos are bad for cities

Not convinced? Then check out what's happening in every corner of the continent. Google "No Casino" and see what comes up. Whether it's Vancouver or Miami, Manhattan, Gettysburg or Pawtucket, city after city, town after town, everyone seems to be fighting a casino proposal.

Now Google "Casino debt." Just as quickly, you find out why, from Nevada to Nantucket, from Windsor to Niagara, casinos all over North America are going broke. And when they fail, the cities they reside in fail too.

Like the compulsive gamblers they create, casinos all over the continent are losing big right now. Instead of walking away from their losses, they are upping the ante by trying to open new operations in more cities. What they are hoping to find is a new generation of gamblers to keep the house afloat. Let's keep Toronto as far away from this mess as possible.

There are good reasons to avoid a casino. The facts and experience of other municipalities make the case pretty clear. In Montreal, virtually 93% of the casino's revenue came straight out of the local economy (MacIasac 1994:38). This means that money bet at the casino wasn’t spent on clothes, rent or food locally, it was sent to the multi-national operator of the gambling facility. Money spent on dining and drinks wasn't spent in local bars or restaurants, it was also sent to the multi-national casino operators.

In Atlantic City, 40% of the bars and restaurants near the casino went bankrupt (Corelli, Memeth and Driedger, 1994b). St Louis had a similar experience. The most quoted expert economist, Earl Grinols of Baylor University, says that as economic drivers or job creators, casinos are "at best a wash, for every job created there is a job lost."

If the business case doesn't scare you, consider the impact on the city's quality of life. From a social perspective, crime goes up. Street crimes, fraud, loan sharking and prostitution rise when a casino comes to town. Before the casino, Atlantic City rarely made the top 50 list of crime-ridden cities. Since gambling came to town they almost always rank near the top.

Casinos are inward looking complexes. Windows are rare; food and drinks served cheap and on site to keep gamblers betting. The head of MGM, when talking to Toronto Council said that a casino requires one parking spot for every slot machine. 5000 are forecast in Toronto. Sound like your vision for the waterfront?

One study reports that property values close to a casino drop by about ten per cent. Based on the meagre amount the province shares with local municipalities, the drop in municipal tax revenue will likely outpace whatever cut of the take Toronto gets.

The casino industry isn't even contemplating paying market-value for public land. The head of MGM has said that if they got a deal on the land, the City could get a bigger slice of the take. This is coming from a company that's losing money hand over fist in Las Vegas right now.

Finally there is the impact on the folks who purport to enjoy gambling. A 2003 report by Earl Grinols calculates the social cost at $289 for every $46 of government revenue. That is over $6.00 in social cost for every $1.00 generated! While most of these costs are tied to crime, there is a significant impact on healthcare costs. Addicted gamblers cost a lot to cure, they often blaze a trail of financial ruin at work and home, and require treatment to manage their affliction. It's next to impossible to get this type of help in Toronto now. Manufacturing more problem gamblers will not help. Proximity to a casino is the most significant risk factor related to problem gambling.

Torontonians have considered this issue before and reached the right conclusion. The province is back again and talking up dreams of Celine Dion and Cirque du Soleil tents, conventions and luxury hotels. They won't produce a business plan, won't release the studies that support their case, won't tell us what the city's cut might be, and they have just passed legislation removing the requirement to hold a referendum on this issue.

Cynical as that might be, it's probably the only smart part of the proposal because it's clear that if it did go to a vote, Toronto would say no again. That you can bet on.

Want to find out more? Follow this link:

I hope to see you at City Hall next Tuesday.

2012-10-02 

 

http://www.thebulletin.ca/cbulletin/content.jsp?ctid=1000136&cnid=1003143