I thought it would be an interesting exercise to list most, but certainly not all, of the reasons why a casino in Glendale is not a good idea. Last week Councilmember Alvarez had a meeting with 20 of her most avid supporters. She invited the Tohono O’odham’s Ned Norris Jr. to present another pitch in support of a casino in Glendale. The attendees heard nothing new and it was an opportunity for Norris to reiterate the TO’s position.
I am disturbed by her action. As a Councilmember one of the duties expected is that once a City Council position on an issue is adopted, one’s responsibility is to advocate FOR the city’s position. If a councilmember disagrees with that position, it must be revealed with the disclaimer that it is one’s personal position and not that of the city’s. It is also not allowable to use city resources in support of one’s personal position. If her Council Assistant was in attendance or if her Council Assistant used city time to order and/or pick up the refreshments it would be an express violation of city policy. To use one’s office and position to invite residents to a meeting to advocate against an adopted city position is morally and ethically reprehensible. There is also the propriety of advocacy for an opponent’s position when the city remains in active litigation.
65 percent of businesses are hurt by the proximity of gambling. Decreases meals and room taxes away from other, traditional sources (shifts tax revenue away from hotels and restaurants in Westgate)
Visitors and residents spend money on gambling that would be spent on other local goods and services
Shifts workers currently in one industry to the gambling industry. Takes workers from other industries and moves them into the casino industry
Social costs increase related to increased crime and pathological gambling
Most patrons come from within 30 miles and participation declines exponentially as distance increases.
Traffic impacts experienced at all times of day. Casino traffic is not seasonal because the number of trips to and from casinos is relatively consistent from month to month. Casinos operate 24 hours per day; there is no peak travel period to and from casinos
Five years after a casino opens, robbery in the community goes up 136 percent, aggravated assault is up 91 percent, auto theft is up 78 percent, burglary is up 50 percent, larceny is up 38 percent, rape is up 21 percent and murder is up 12 percent, compared to neighboring communities. Crime is low shortly after a casino opens, and grows over time, costing the average adult $75 per year
Each slot machine costs the surrounding community one job per year
Business and personal bankruptcies increase between 18 and 42 percent, while ‘impulse’ business transactions in the area decline by 65 percent.”
Every slot machine takes $60,000 out of the local, consumer economy
Gamblers spend 10 percent less on food; 25 percent less on clothing and 35 percent less on savings
For every one job that the casino creates, one is lost in the 35-mile feeder market
The Tohono O’odham ignored their promise to their fellow Tribal leaders to keep another casino out of the Phoenix Metropolitan area
It destroys the state-wide voter approved gaming compact and will cause casinos to be built in many other Arizona cities
All of these issues will directly and severely impact the 10,000 Glendale residents living the closest to the proposed casino
All of these reasons have been cited and attributed to the original researchers on the subject in my previous posts about the casino.
Opponents have said the Tribes that oppose this casino in Glendale are doing so purely out of greed, to protect their market share. Yet the Tohono O’odham wants to site this casino in Glendale for exactly the same reason, pure greed, for it would open a very lucrative market far, far away from their Tribal lands in southern Arizona.
I can’t fault you for having a principled opposition to gaming. It is a matter of personal preference in many respects, and as an elected official, you were certainly entitled to vote your personal position. But despite all the negatives you list above, casino gaming — albeit in a very limited, highly regulated fashion — is a legal activity in the state of Arizona. So are bars, horse racing, and other forms of entertainment to which many have principled opposition. I am assuming you voted in favor of zoning decisions involving many other activities that you probably do not personally support. So the real question is, as an elected official, do you believe you had a responsibility to uphold the law? I know this is a matter of some dispute, but a member of city council does not get to interpret the law in that way. Judges have that responsibility, and judges have made it pretty clear that what the tribe did is what they were legally entitled to do.
Jack,
I agree with your premise partially. Legislative bodies, including city councils, make laws. Judicial bodies interpret those laws, either upholding them or striking down all or in part. Gaming is legal and especially casinos due to the state-wide voter approval of Proposition 202. Proposition 202 was ‘sold’ to the voters with a publicity pamphlet. In that pamphlet it quite clearly promised “no new casinos” in the Phoenix Metropolitan area. Then Governor Jane D. Hull insisted that this principle be clearly understood and accepted by all parties, including the Tribes (that included the Tohono O’odham).
To date the issue is not settled. There is still one 9th Circuit Court decision, that is appeal-able and another 9th Circuit Court decision that has not been rendered as of this date. Judge Campbell has asked all parties to submit written briefs on one outstanding issue. They are due next week by May 22nd. Then he will render a decision on the final issue that is before him.
Yes, I believe legislators should uphold the law or pass new law that trumps the original law with which they disagree. It has been done countless times previous. To what specific law are you referring that should be upheld? The state gaming compact?
Looking forward to receiving your response.
And no, I did not vote for zoning decisions involving other activities that I do not support, i.e., nude bars, attached housing ala cracker barrel size and style projects and more package liquor stores in an area already over saturated with the same.
Hi Joyce, I enjoy your blogs but I feel compelled to make a suggestion with articles like this. I know this is your hobby blog and not beholden to any traditional editorial standards, but I frankly have real trouble giving any credence to your postings when you spout such precise figures and offer no attribution as to where they came from. Could you mention the studies where you derived all of these numbers from please?
“Robbery goes up 136 percent, aggravated assault is up 91 percent, auto theft is up 78 percent, burglary is up 50 percent, larceny is up 38 percent, rape is up 21 percent and murder is up 12 percent, compared to neighboring communities.”
Did you know that 88% of statistics are made up?
See what I mean? My figure is meaningless if I seemingly just pulled it out of the air.
I am not a casino proponent, but I trust that decision makers know better than to accept any numbers thrust upon them without any basis like you have done.
Or if that’s how council works, then that would explain a lot of things…
John,
You must be new to my blogs. If you take the time to go back and read my previous blogs on the casino issue you will see that the summary and the numbers I use are attributable to various researchers in the field. The reasons I listed in the current blog that you read tonight are taken from my previous blogs. You can see the citations in those.
Dear Joyce
Would it do any good to file a complant about council member Alarez?
Ron,
I cannot answer that. It is up to Alvarez’ constituents to decide.
Joyce,
You definitely bring up some food for thought. I am actually a supporter of the casino. I’m not an avid gambler but I think it would make a good destination for the West valley. I don’t really hold to the “if people spend money there they won’t spend money in Glendale” line because I think that we are not talking dollars at the level where it would make a difference. Certainly the stores in Scottsdale over by Talking Stick have thrived for many years. I believe Westgate might be able to milk some of that revenue as well. So there WOULD be a benefit to get some “butts in the seats” in the local area as well.
That being said, some of your economical impact numbers are cause for thought from a “benefit to the city” standpoint. Would the “losses” over time be greater than the millions Glendale has spent fighting the Casino? Who knows. Time will tell.
I DID want to question some of your statistics in this particular post however. I find it extremely difficult to believe that Alvarez can drum up 20 supporters. Really? Have people actually LISTENED to her?? She’s a one trick pony and it’s not even an interesting trick. We can only hope she sticks to her single term promise before she causes any real damage or prevents any real advancements that could help the city.
Keep up the blog. You’re one of the best sources of Glendale Info.
Dougless,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. In my previous blogs on the casino I quote quite a bit of material from researchers that demonstrates that a casino is like a giant whirlpool, sucking all available dollars to it while stripping dollars away from nearby businesses. Please refer to my previous posts for the information and citations of the researchers.
Yes, Alvarez, does have a small group of hardcore supporters and they are probably the only ones that listen to her. It’s a symbiotic relationship.
Thanks for the nice comments about my blog. It is appreciated.
To your latest point, the researchers you cite are known in the industry for having a strong bias against gaming, and have even described it as a threat to national security. The research you cite doesn’t reference the limited gaming compacts Arizona has in place, nor does it have any Arizona specific information. It would make more sense for the research to come from a University not paid by an opponent or proponent of the project to undertake analysis of the impacts of gaming IN ARIZONA, since we have now more than 11 years of the current system. Talking Stick is gorgeous. Wild Horse Pass is amazing. Super Bowl teams have stayed there. I think the way Arizona has it set up works, and the Arizona set up legally included the Tohono O’odham, according to the latest round of rulings.
Jack,
I don’t disagree. I suggested in one of my previous blogs that it was time for some serious, unbiased work in this area. I understand your support for the Tohono O’odham and we shall agree to disagree. I have made my points and you, yours. As for litigation, it’s not over yet. Until all legal avenues are exhausted, I will continue to oppose a project that will do great harm in an urbanized area – and a little more than one mile from my home. Reality is that it will affect the quality of life of 10,000 Glendale residents that will be living in very close proximity.I don’t believe that you would enjoy living next to it or any other casino, no matter how “amazing.” Everything you have cited is on a reservation far from urbanization with the exception of the one adjacent to the City of Scottsdale – not in Scottsdale, mind you.
Joyce, I stumbled on you blog today and I like what you are doing. I started a blog a few months ago to keep people up to date on what is going on with the casino. Many of the people who comment have said that it is about campaign contributions. I have tried to do some research on this topic, but it is not my area of expertise. If you get a chance please take a look at my blog and feel free to comment. It would help the discussion. Also if you want to send me content to share I would like to post it. The blog is nodiceaz.wordpress.com. Thank you.
Hi Jan, I replied to your comment via email. I hope it was helpful. Please feel free to send your readers to https://www.joyceclarkunfiltered.com. If you would like to post a particular piece of mine on the casino, I can send you the original file.