I'm glad they're paying attention to ballot language wording this time.  Didn't happen on the smoking ban.

Governor Says He Would Likely Veto Slot Machine Proposal

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland said he would "likely" veto a proposal to put slot machines at racetracks across the state.  Strickland said Thursday he remains opposed to expanded gambling, particularly through measures that could become law without the consent of Ohio voters.  The Ohio Racing Commission has endorsed a proposal from track owners that would allow the Legislature to put lottery-run slot machines at the state's seven horse tracks.  No ballot measure would be put before voters.

 

Some lawmakers are considering the idea to help raise revenue for the state during a severe economic downturn. Strickland previously expanded the lottery with the Keno game but said a reasonable person would see the difference between that and thousands of slot machines.

 

Full story at http://www.newsnet5.com/news/19139161/detail.html

^Why is it always slots first? I think slots are dirty compared to table games.

Slot machines bring in the most money. In Las Vegas, they make up half of all gambling revenue.

People are sometimes intimidated by table games, but never by slots.  There's a zen quality to them for a lot of folks.  I hate them, I like table games.  We should offer something for everyone.  We also shouldn't cowtow to the horse lobby.  These should go downtown and not in racetracks.  Not in bars either.

They are collecting signatures for the petition all over Uptown.  I have been approached on Calhoun, Ludlow, and by the CRC on campus to sign.

Michigan could lose if Ohio OKs casinos

Voters may decide to put gaming halls in Toledo, 3 other cities

Nathan Hurst / The Detroit News

 

Forget the football rivalry.  The Buckeye State is suiting up to challenge Michigan in an even bigger game: casino gambling.  A ballot initiative likely facing Ohio voters in November would allow one full-scale casino resort each in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and -- most worrisome for Michigan's gambling halls -- Toledo.

 

Currently, Ohioans' gambling options within the state are limited.  There aren't any casinos.  But there are horse racing tracks, bingo and lottery operations in addition to off-track betting facilities.  Every surrounding state, though, except Kentucky, offers casino gambling within an hour's drive of the Ohio border.

 

Most executives with Detroit's three casinos -- MGM Grand Detroit, MotorCity and Greektown -- were reluctant to talk publicly about the potential effect of the proposed Ohio casinos.  They said Ohio gamblers make up a significant part of their companies' patronage but added that out-of-state patrons spend far less time and money at Detroit casinos than Michiganians do.  But they did say that more convenient gambling facilities in Ohio would make it harder for Detroit casinos to continue marketing to a regional gambling audience around the Great Lakes.

 

Full article at http://www.detnews.com/article/20090429/BIZ/904290366/Michigan-could-lose-if-Ohio-OKs-casinos

I find it most interesting about the Dan Gilbert piece.  I never really thought of his initiative to make money in Cleveland may end up hurting his home city and home state.

Berding to drop casino role

 

The National Football League said today it was OK for a Bengals executive, who’s also a city councilman, to try to help bring a casino to the city. But Councilman Jeff Berding said he’s stepping out of the the issue “out of an abundance of caution.”

 

He had initially said, weeks ago, that his involvement with the effort to put a casino amendment on the ballot in November did not violate league rules against inappropriate associations with casinos and gambling.  But Friday afternoon, asked to respond to the NFL’s decision that he could continue promoting the casino, Berding said: “I am moving on to issues that are more important to the city, and out of an abundance of caution will no longer be involved in the issue.”

 

He has been one of the most out-front proponents in the effort to put an amendment on the ballot in November that would bring four casinos to Ohio. One of those casinos would be at Broadway Commons, on the north edge of downtown Cincinnati. He held a press conference in March at the site.  But Berding is also director of sales and public affairs for the Bengals, which subjects him to rules for NFL employees.

 

Full article at

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090501/NEWS01/905020332/1055/NEWS

I'm growing tired of all the casino backers using this jobs talking point as if that's the main issue driving the initiative.  Let's just be real here...you can make a crap ton of money.  There's nothing wrong with that, let's debate the merits of the issue and move on.  Every issue can pull out the jobs card if they really want to.

I'm kinda mixed on the race tracks and gambling thing. I've always voted down the casino bills, but there are serious issues with Ohio and KY's horse industries because the betting money is going elsewhere. Honestly, I'd rather the tracks have table games (of skill) instead of VLTs or slots.

Slot machines could be coming soon to Ohio racetracks

by Aaron Marshall and Reginald Fields/Plain Dealer Columbus Bureau

Friday June 19, 2009, 3:22 PM

 

Charlie Neibergall/Associated Press

Gov. Ted Strickland has announced a proposal to expand gambling in Ohio through legalizing slot machines.

COLUMBUS — Under the gun to fill a $3.2 billion budget hole, Gov. Ted Strickland proposed expanding gambling in Ohio through legalizing slot machines.

 

continued at>>>>>>>>>

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2009/06/slot_machines_coming_soon_to_o.html

 

pdf proposal:

http://blog.cleveland.com/open_impact/2009/06/Agency%20Overview%20for%20Budget%20Framework.pdf

 

UC study: Casinos could create 34,000 jobs

Business Courier of Cincinnati

 

A study by the University of Cincinnati’s Economics Center for Education & Research projects the creation of 34,000 jobs and $11 billion in economic impact if a proposed casino ballot issue is approved by voters.  The center conducted the study for the Ohio Jobs & Growth Committee, which organized the effort to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot.  The amendment would ask voters to approve building casinos in Cleveland, Cincinnati, Toledo and Columbus.  Wyomissing, Pa.-based Penn National Gaming Inc. and Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert would be investors in the $1 billion proposal.

 

According to the study, the initial investment and construction phase for the casinos, expected to begin in 2010, would create 19,000 jobs.  Another 16,000 permanent jobs would be created once the casinos began operating, by late 2012, according to a news release.  The initial economic impact would be $388 million for a Cincinnati casino; $656 million for Cleveland; $504 million from Columbus; and $302 million for Toledo, according to the study.

 

Full article at http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2009/07/06/daily25.html

I'm not sure whether this belongs here or whether it belongs in the Ohio politics thread(s).

 

Just wondering about how everyone feels about whether Ohio should have casinos or not.

 

I will be voting against it as I don't believe in gambling.

 

Also I am not convinced as to whether it will help bring in money to the state. If it does, I am not sure if the money will go where it is supposed to.

 

What are your thoughts?

I will be voting against it as I don't believe in gambling.

 

Also I am not convinced as to whether it will help bring in money to the state. If it does, I am not sure if the money will go where it is supposed to.

 

Aside from employment from the staff and nearby development that spawned from casino traffic, casinos mainly just shift were the people's money is spent - not necessarily "generate" new rev.

 

The problem is, take Cincinnati for instance, we have 3 casinos within a short drive from us ... one being only 20 minutes from Downtown (Hollywood Casino). During the last casino push in Ohio, the owners of that casino (called Argosy at the time) made $25 mill in contributions to fight the proposed location in Wilmington. Why is this? Is it because Ohians aren't bringing money to Indiana?

 

I don't think casinos are an answer to the problem, however when you have one 20 mins. away, but it's in another state - you need to rethink your moral values.

 

Let's keep that money in Ohio ... No one lives in SE Indiana. Now, if we can persuade these SE Indiana casinos to close because it's not fair to the state of Ohio .... then that's a different story. Same goes for PA & MI.

Dont we already have a casino thread?  Or is it "hidden" for cleaning, as I couldn't find it.

No...look at Detroit and Michigan in general. I'm not saying the casinos can't be successful but they aren't the magical cure for all economic ills.

 

The casino's in Detroit are surprisingly busy at night, and probably saved a big chunk of downtown.  Without them, I doubt there would be very many people visiting downtown Detroit at 10pm on a weekend night.  I'm voting for casino's because of the proposed location in Cincinnati (downtown) and how I think it will help the surrounding economy and nightlife.  I'd probably only visit a few times, but the surrounding bars and hotels might become more of a draw.

If the casinos and slot machines at the race tracks can keep the state of Ohio from raising taxes, I think that helps the economy in Ohio long term.  I also think it makes the state more attractive to conventions and visitors.  It adds to the overall entertainment of the area which is probably good. 

 

I think the time has past when a casino can really effect an area substantially.  The whole gambling thing is over-saturated and many casinos are struggling.  When casinos and slot machines appear in Ohio areas like Erie, PA and Mountaineer, WV will suffer and possibly close.  They are being totally subsidized by Northeast Ohioans.

 

I personally think if done right (not fortresses of solitude) and in a lively downtown setting, they could add to the attractiveness of an entertainment district.  The ones in the middle of nowhere, or on the oukskirts of depressed cities just seem sad.  I think adults should have entertainment options available to them in a dynamic city...and that includes strip clubs IMO.  I also think Ohio could gain a lot of tourist traffic (and tax revenue) by just offering limited liquor licenses that extend last call on Saturday night to 4 am. 

I added a poll to this thread for obvious reasons.

Better the money stays in the state than goes to Michigan or PA

Has the lottery "helped" our schools?  About as much as casinos would "help" our state's economy.  JMO.

If these are the best a given place can do for economic development ...that's pretty darn sad, utterly pathetic, and demonstrates an extreme lack of creativity. Develop an economy around entities that can help produce an intelligent, articulate, healthy populace..Not those that foster dysfunction so only a few gain. Aspire to be more...not mediocre and do the copy cat thing. 

Casinos have to built, first and foremost, and that means jobs right there.  They also have to be staffed, which means more jobs.  Where casinos go, hotels and restaraunts follow, which brings in even more jobs.  Casinos also have to pay taxes, which, goes back to the state.

 

For anyone who's on the fence about whether or not they're a good idea, or afraid that they'll bring in more crime or whatever, look at Lawrenceburg and the surrounding area from before the casinos and look at it now.

 

But we can't have that here.  No, gambling's a sin!  That must be why it's so prevalent at Catholic festivals.  :roll:

I have very little knowledge of what a casino can and can't do for a neighborhood/city/region/state.  However, my #1 concern in Cleveland is the crowd it will attract after the initial buzz wears off.  Cleveland is not a tourist town and few people outside of NEO are going to come to Cleveland simply because we now have a casino.  After the Northern Ohio residents have tried it out a few times I worry that the casino will be dominated by those who should not be gambling in the first place due to a lack of income.  Whether it's wrong or not, people who come off as "trashy" or "poor" tend to scare off the suburbanites that we need to sustain a successful casino and spinoff businesses. 

 

Therefore I do think initially (first 5-10 years) the casino will help the economy but my fears are the years after in which the buzz of having a casino nearby wears off.  I really hope someone can tell me I'm dead wrong because I really want to be.

no...no...no...no

In response to tradition7:

Similar fears were expressed in Detroit prior to the introduction of casinos.  It has been many years now and it does not seem those fears have been realized.

In response to tradition7:

Similar fears were expressed in Detroit prior to the introduction of casinos.  It has been many years now and it does not seem those fears have been realized.

 

cite sources please.

 

the drain on those casinos has done more harm than good.  Detroit isn't experiencing an uptick in people visiting.

Everyone in Ohio that voted "No" on the casino issue last election, and will continue to vote "No" on future casino issues needs to go to Wilmington and tell everyone there that they don't deserve jobs.

In response to tradition7:

Similar fears were expressed in Detroit prior to the introduction of casinos. It has been many years now and it does not seem those fears have been realized.

 

cite sources please.

 

the drain on those casinos has done more harm than good. Detroit isn't experiencing an uptick in people visiting.

 

I visited Detroit and the casinos and was surprised at the crowd.  I didn't visit for the casinos by any means, and I didn't even enter them, but i hung out downtown and had dinner at a restaurant that wouldn't have been there if the casino's hadn't been built.  Without the casinos downtown Detroit would have been empty.  It was essentially the only place any people were at all.  Nothing bad about the crowd, and the whole district was clearly bringing in money that would have otherwise gone to the suburbs.

In response to tradition7:

Similar fears were expressed in Detroit prior to the introduction of casinos. It has been many years now and it does not seem those fears have been realized.

 

cite sources please.

 

the drain on those casinos has done more harm than good. Detroit isn't experiencing an uptick in people visiting.

 

I visited Detroit and the casinos and was surprised at the crowd. I didn't visit for the casinos by any means, and I didn't even enter them, but i hung out downtown and had dinner at a restaurant that wouldn't have been there if the casino's hadn't been built. Without the casinos downtown Detroit would have been empty. It was essentially the only place any people were at all. Nothing bad about the crowd, and the whole district was clearly bringing in money that would have otherwise gone to the suburbs.

 

That's crazy talk.  You must not have been looking very hard, because everyone knows that the only kind of people casinos attract are pickpockets and prostitutes.  :roll:

In response to tradition7:

Similar fears were expressed in Detroit prior to the introduction of casinos.  It has been many years now and it does not seem those fears have been realized.

 

cite sources please.

 

the drain on those casinos has done more harm than good.  Detroit isn't experiencing an uptick in people visiting.

 

I visited Detroit and the casinos and was surprised at the crowd.  I didn't visit for the casinos by any means, and I didn't even enter them, but i hung out downtown and had dinner at a restaurant that wouldn't have been there if the casino's hadn't been built.  Without the casinos downtown Detroit would have been empty.  It was essentially the only place any people were at all.  Nothing bad about the crowd, and the whole district was clearly bringing in money that would have otherwise gone to the suburbs.

 

Many restaurants and business (via the detroit papers and some of our own research when planning events in Detroit) state that their business have suffered because the casinos are inclusive.  Very few people are patronizing the businesses.

I don't think it'll have a significant effect on Ohio as a whole, but I think it'll have a positive effect on the neighborhood where it's built. I'm opposed to gambling, but it's going to happen either way, so I'd rather it happen here where we get the tax money. Unfortunately I think that if Cleveland builds one, it'll hurt Detroit & Erie, and Detroit & Erie already have enough problems.

If Cincinnati approved a riverboat casino or two to dock on the Ohio River, our financial problems would be solved.  This is fact.

Any thoughts on how Cincinnati's location would affect downtown Cincinnati businesses?  If it is built on Broadway Commons, then I don't think there are many businesses nearby (withing 4 blocks) that could lose business.  Would businesses even further away really suffer?  Are those people coming down only to gamble just not adding any additional benefit?  Any general thoughts on immediate versus general location impact?

 

Sorry to get so specific, but I have a bit of a concern living only 5 blocks away from the proposed location.

If Cincinnati approved a riverboat casino or two to dock on the Ohio River, our financial problems would be solved.  This is fact.

Everyone in Ohio that voted "No" on the casino issue last election, and will continue to vote "No" on future casino issues needs to go to Wilmington and tell everyone there that they don't deserve jobs.

 

Many people that voted against the casino issue the last time did so because they felt the plan was a very poor one that would not allow for gambling in other parts of the state.  I don't remember anyone saying that people in Wilmington do not deserve jobs. 

My opinion is that a casino can help in terms of increased development and keeping tax money in the state.  However, I do not think it will fix all of the region's problems. 

Any thoughts on how Cincinnati's location would affect downtown Cincinnati businesses?  If it is built on Broadway Commons, then I don't think there are many businesses nearby (withing 4 blocks) that could lose business.  Would businesses even further away really suffer?  Are those people coming down only to gamble just not adding any additional benefit?  Any general thoughts on immediate versus general location impact?

 

Sorry to get so specific, but I have a bit of a concern living only 5 blocks away from the proposed location.

 

I actually wouldn't be very happy if a casino plopped down on Broadway Commons.  I just don't think it's the best location for one.  In my opinion, a riverboat casino would be much more conducive to the city's needs.

 

Everyone in Ohio that voted "No" on the casino issue last election, and will continue to vote "No" on future casino issues needs to go to Wilmington and tell everyone there that they don't deserve jobs.

 

Many people that voted against the casino issue the last time did so because they felt the plan was a very poor one that would not allow for gambling in other parts of the state.  I don't remember anyone saying that people in Wilmington do not deserve jobs. 

 

That's definitely the message those voters sent.  DHL employed so many of those people, and after those jobs vanished, for the rest of Ohio to strike down a casino was criminal.  Everyone that voted "No" ought to be ashamed of themselves.  The plan wasn't perfect, but it wasn't what the groups buying up ad space in opposition to it said it was, either.  Ohio needed (and still needs) jobs NOW. 

^You have a very different idea of criminal than I do.

I guess so.  When the people literally have the power to help save a small town without putting forth any more effort than coloring in a circle, and choose not to, I consider that to be criminal.

^And I consider you to be over dramatic.

I guess so.  When the people literally have the power to help save a small town without putting forth any more effort than coloring in a circle, and choose not to, I consider that to be criminal.

 

I would prefer to make a vote that will benefit the entire state of 11 million people in the long run at the expense of a town of 12,000 people rather than help 12,000 people at the expense of 11 million Ohians. (meaning the proposal was not nearly as good as a state casino proposal could be imo)

I don't know why everyone always points to Detroit when the casino issue comes up, I'm pretty sure there are casinos in Pittsburgh and their economy seems to be doing just fine. Casino's aren't meant to drive the economy rather be a catalyst to it. I also think it would be nice to have a first class hotel/casino option to dangle in front of potential Medical Mart conventions...

I actually wouldn't be very happy if a casino plopped down on Broadway Commons.

I, and many others who have invested and continue to invest around this area would like to see a more productive use for Broadway Commons than a parking lot. The impact of the casino will be felt in areas like Pendleton, Main St., the Quarter and beyond breathing new life into now vacant properties such as the Diner, Neon's, etc... which will also both employ and pay taxes, much unlike today. The casino itself is not the silver bullet, but it, combined with an expanded convention center, two new stadiums, a revitalized fountain square, etc all lend to a stronger downtown in Cincinnati. A casino in our portfolio gives us an advantage over most other casinos outside of Ohio as most are not seated in a downtown area therefor only draw people to the venue for 1 reason. We are not monolitic in our offerings like a Lawrenceburg is--or a Wilmington would have been.

 

If you stand against it for moral reasons then that is one thing, but to say it will not have a positive impact on business in and around downtown is ignoring reality. I am investing in a business right now that will not depend on the casino, but would be positively impacted if and when construction starts and I know for a fact, I am not the only one with investment money who is keeping a close eye on November.

^I was preaching the same thing when Tarbell was on his Stadium at Broadway Commons Campaign but now with millions into refurbishing the existing coliseum, I believe that train has sailed.  Now we can have it all, with a casino, not instead of one.

^And I consider you to be over dramatic.

 

Yeah, you're probably right.  People losing their jobs, health insurance and overall ability to provide for their families and keep a roof over their heads is a laugh riot.  :roll:

 

I guess so. When the people literally have the power to help save a small town without putting forth any more effort than coloring in a circle, and choose not to, I consider that to be criminal.

 

I would prefer to make a vote that will benefit the entire state of 11 million people in the long run at the expense of a town of 12,000 people rather than help 12,000 people at the expense of 11 million Ohians. (meaning the proposal was not nearly as good as a state casino proposal could be imo)

 

How would that have been "at the expense of 11 million Ohians"?  Are you referring to the misinformation about how it woud have limited other casinos to come into the state?

 

I actually wouldn't be very happy if a casino plopped down on Broadway Commons.

I, and many others who have invested and continue to invest around this area would like to see a more productive use for Broadway Commons than a parking lot. The impact of the casino will be felt in areas like Pendleton, Main St., the Quarter and beyond breathing new life into now vacant properties such as the Diner, Neon's, etc... which will also both employ and pay taxes, much unlike today. The casino itself is not the silver bullet, but it, combined with an expanded convention center, two new stadiums, a revitalized fountain square, etc all lend to a stronger downtown in Cincinnati. A casino in our portfolio gives us an advantage over most other casinos outside of Ohio as most are not seated in a downtown area therefor only draw people to the venue for 1 reason. We are not monolitic in our offerings like a Lawrenceburg is--or a Wilmington would have been.

 

If you stand against it for moral reasons then that is one thing, but to say it will not have a positive impact on business in and around downtown is ignoring reality. I am investing in a business right now that will not depend on the casino, but would be positively impacted if and when construction starts and I know for a fact, I am not the only one with investment money who is keeping a close eye on November.

 

Whoa, I never said a casino wouldn't have a positive impact on the surrounding areas.  Let's not put words in mouths, mkay?

 

What I said was that I don't think a casino on Broadway Commons is the best place for it.  I'll add to that, that I think we can better use of BC.  No one wants to see it remain a parking lot, I assure you.

Well, if this passes, there's a damn good chance I will lose my job and the roof over my head.  Why, because the casino proposal includes elements that are directly competitive with my place of employment, but they will likely use those facilities as loss leaders to get people into their casino.  How many of those thousands of jobs are going to be offset by job losses at other entertainment venues?  Most, in my guesstimation.  Why don't you care about those jobs?  Maybe you should go around to those people and apologize, and tell them "I'm sorry, but your job isn't as valuable as the new job being created at the new state enforced monopoly casino!"

Well, if this passes, there's a damn good chance I will lose my job and the roof over my head. Why, because the casino proposal includes elements that are directly competitive with my place of employment, but they will likely use those facilities as loss leaders to get people into their casino. How many of those thousands of jobs are going to be offset by job losses at other entertainment venues? Most, in my guesstimation. Why don't you care about those jobs? Maybe you should go around to those people and apologize, and tell them "I'm sorry, but your job isn't as valuable as the new job being created at the new state enforced monopoly casino!"

 

Making that post without stating exactly what your job is, is useless.

I'm somewhat numb to the social ills that could be created by putting casinos in downtowns across the state, and would possibly not care at all about these developments if they weren't inherently damaging to the surrounding neighborhood due to their massiveness, general tackiness, and poor engagement with the adjacent urban fabric.  I just imagine these huge EIFS clad towers with gold mirrored glass,fake roman sculptures, and laser light shows for the kiddies.  If they were smaller and could seemlessly fit into existing neighborhoods (sans massive parking decks) they could be somewhat interesting additions to the city.  But I guess partonizing to the lowest common denominator, and almost in a way making it family friendly (disturbing) is a must with casinos.  Just wish this kind of thing could have a higher level of sophistication.

However, another thing to think about is what is all the tax money that would be generated by the casinos be used for?  I've heard schools, but what about supporting local and state public transit systems?