Casino-Free Philadelphia: Testimony

Messages of Support

Lily — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:31:40 +0000

Here are some of the messages that you have shared in response to the passage of SB 711, which now allows slots on credit, tables games, an extention for Foxwoods, exemption from the smoking ban for Philly casinos, and much more. Some messages were of support, some of outrage, some are stories of personal troubles brought by the predatory gambling industry. Thank you everyone. Pease continue to send your messages of support to Lily [at] CasinoFreePhila [dot] org.

Your stand is an example of courage and integrity. I feel inspired by your work, deeply touched in my heart, wondering how you are doing, how you are taking care of yourselves, your souls, your brave souls. I hold you dearly in my spirit, and my thoughts are mixed with prayers for your joy and strength, and for your victory.

Please keep up the great work to keep these casinos out of our city. They will not solve the core economic problems we face. They are like putting a bandaid on a broken bone.

Thank you, AS

I am very proud to be associated with Casinos Free Philly and you have done a remarkable job so far!!! My only regret is that I don't have enough time to be more involved!!

I support Casino-Free Philadelphia because I don't believe in government relying on destructive, addictive behavior to fund our services. I support CFP because I believe in building livable communities and because I believe that working together builds Community. I don't want a casino 1000 yards from my Philly family's home. Although I am thousands of miles away, we face similar battles on all our home fronts, and we need to share strength with each other. Lastly, I support CFP because I've seen what perseverance, integrity, creativity and resourcefulness has accomplished before against great odds.

GT, Portland, Oregon

What a great way to boost an already broken economy, let’s allow gamblers more access to credit and even allow credit card use at the slot machine lol. Sure, as I’m having my fourth drink of the night, I’ll just plug my card into that slot and push away, who cares? I’m feeling good! Look honey I haven’t hit the ATM at all tonight. Endless playtime. What? it’s already 3 am? We’ve been here since noon? Wow seems like we just got here! Let me try one more machine, I feel lucky. ------ 3 weeks later -------- honey, yes dear, did you see this bill? No dear, sweetheart it’s over $5000.00. -----WHAT? How are we going to pay this? Wife starts crying. I didn’t know we spent that much honey, we where having such a good time. I see this playing out over and over and over...bankruptcy, foreclosure, and divorce.

Is the city, state, in such need of money that they are willing to break the backs of good working class people? Is it not bad enough that paychecks and soc-sec checks already being thrown away? I myself have 2 shoeboxes filled with cash advance stubs from casinos, maxed out 2 cards 25,000 each. Took out 6000.00 in one day. I wasn’t stopped once.

Every week I receive over 10 offers, coupons, dinners, trips, in my mail, I even get calls from a host about events at the great casino. People who are gamblers now won’t need cash to support the habit, just plastic, made easy because you won’t even have to leave the machine. And there’s already a big credit problem in this country. I hope there’s enough money to support the courts, because you’ll need millions for all the divorce, bankruptcy, and credit card fraud, cases you’ll be dealing with in the court system.

It’s stuff like the following that that keeps my fight up! “Some say I’m a sinner, …some say I’m a saint.” (Richard Sprauge, Dec 2009) Umm…yeah. Ok, Dick.

I believe Casino-Free and anyone else who cares needs to spread its message to the people, not those in power. Let children, teens and average adults know how sick gambling really is. That message must not be getting across. Could it ever be preached in our schools, the way Say No to Drugs or Abstinence or No Smoking have been? Can Gambler's Anonymous get more public? It's just another destructive addiction that eventually will be exposed for what it is. But after how much damage is done? Not a very uplifting message of Support, but I wish I could do more,

Among the things that confound me about the support my government representatives give to gambling arise from the comparison of Gus the Gambling Groundhog to Joe Camel. It amazes me that there was such a huge, and successful outcry against the tobacco industry appealing to children through this cartoon character, Joe Camel, but none against Gus and the innocence with which he appears in these ads - Scratch, Scratch, Scratch! ...dazed and amazed...

Keep up the good work! This is only a temporary setback, as the economic reality of too much casino capacity is rippling through the East Coast. The casino operators will have an increasingly difficult time surviving economically, so the pickings for CSF will soon be getting easier, no matter how much encouragement Harrisburg or the City try to give them.

As a society, we can't afford these casinos

Casino-Free Philly — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:53:10 +0000

Published Aug. 17, 2009, in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Regarding "We Told You So: Casino Gambling Is Doing More Harm Than Good" (Aug. 6 Perspectives): Bruce Barron is right to point out that Pennsylvania casinos are most likely to result in a net economic loss for Pittsburgh, other Pennsylvania cities and the state.

The best evidence shows casinos fail to bring economic growth. A study published in the American Journal of Economics and Sociology shows that, in 11 states, over a 14-year period, casino revenues have no positive impact on real per-capita income.

Further, in the current issue of The Journal of Economics, Ball State University professor Michael Hicks reports that low-paying jobs in slots parlors actually depress salaries in the local economy. These casinos make millions of dollars, but those dollars come out of the pockets of local people and are taken away from local businesses.

Chicago real estate developer and billionaire Neil Bluhm, owner of Pittsburgh's Rivers Casino, is also trying to build a casino in Philadelphia in the middle of a tight-knit, residential neighborhood on historic land.

Mr. Bluhm's casino is poised to wreck the fabric of the neighborhood, pave over archaeological discoveries and contribute to job loss and addiction in the city of Philadelphia, which needs none of this. The money made in the casino will line the pockets of Mr. Bluhm while the city suffers. And even those revenues are vulnerable to the next competing casino down the line.

We are calling on Mr. Bluhm to pull the plug on his Philadelphia project, and on Gov. Ed Rendell and Philadelphia's Mayor Michael Nutter to work toward truly sustainable economic development, instead of predatory business that would undermine the city.

Daniel Hajdo

Volunteer, Casino-Free Philadelphia

Philadelphia

The writer is an adjunct professor of political science at Rowan University.

The tyranny of casinos

Casino-Free Philly — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 08:08:18 +0000

The afterglow of July Fourth is a great time to reconsider the fight to keep casinos out of Philadelphia, especially if you care about the spirit of Independence Day and the betrayal of it exactly five years ago by our elected officials.

On July 4, 1776, the First Continental Congress passed the Declaration of Independence, stating that government derives its power from the consent of the governed. On the July Fourth weekend in 2004, a group of politicians in Harrisburg, acting without the consent or input of the governed, passed Act 71, which allows casino gambling in Pennsylvania.

Now, many of those same pols are frantically working to amend Act 71 to permit not only slot machines at casinos but also craps, blackjack and other table games. Again, they are operating below the radar.

In 2004, the pro-casino drive was led by Gov. Rendell, a long-time champion of the gambling industry, and by now-disgraced state Sen. Vincent Fumo, architect of Act 71, which was sneaked into law while the rest of us were roasting hot dogs and watching fireworks.

Both men realized that we the governed would never consent to a bill that called for granting 14 state licenses to an industry that aggravates social and economic ills as quickly as it generates profits for itself.

That's why they worked in secret to enlist the support of legislators and investors while completely excluding from the process almost all the people who had, in good faith, voted them into office. It took until 2009 for local pols to show their true colors by supporting the casinos.

One by one, they all said the same thing: It's not their fault, and they'd rather side with their political allies in Harrisburg than with their constituents.

In choosing sides, Mayor Nutter, City Councilman Frank DiCicco and others had to ignore studies indicating that casinos suck more money out of communities than they give back. They had to pretend that Philadelphia, the largest city in the nation proposed for slots parlors, won't experience major upsurges in crime and poverty. They decided to support, without input from constituents, a program that would further destabilize the city economy and betray our cultural character.

The mayor and the others were fully backed by our city's unelected officials, who seem to be equally disdainful of the people they supposedly serve. That disdain was on view when the City Planning Commission approved a plan to build the SugarHouse casino on the riverfront, close to neighborhoods that had no say in the matter.

The key here is "had no say."

As casinos come ever closer in Philadelphia, it isn't with the consent of the governed. It's with the consent of officials who betrayed the public and acted in the interest of themselves, casino owners and a small number of wealthy investors.

But the foes of casinos have stopped listening to the political double-talk and are focusing on other ways to stop the community-crushing gambling complexes that SugarHouse and Foxwoods aim to impose on us.

The alternative would be to roll over and let the casino industry wreck our city. The city where Jefferson, Franklin and other enlightened leaders produced a document that called for a permanent change in the relationship between government and the governed.

Our current crop of politicians ignores the extent to which the Declaration changed the expectations of the governed.

It's up to us to remind them that we, the people, have the right to fight laws that run counter to the public good and, this time around, to vote out any politician who expands gambling without public input.

Still time to derail the slots

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:14:25 +0000

The casino express is chugging toward Philadelphia, and local politicians are greasing the rails.

Mayor Michael Nutter speaks of the need to expedite the approval process for a slot-machine parlor in the old Strawbridge's building, two blocks from Independence Mall. City Councilman Frank DiCicco introduced legislation to welcome a terrible redesign of the SugarHouse casino proposed for the waterfront.

At one time, both of those men sided with community groups fighting to keep casinos out of the city's neighborhoods. But they flip-flopped this year, citing the failure of their half-hearted court challenges as well as empty threats from a few legislators in Harrisburg.

Casinos make little economic sense, and they would exacerbate the social problems already plaguing the city. Candidate Nutter understood this back in 2007, when he wrote, "I do not support gambling as an economic development tool or as a way to fund ongoing government programs, no matter how worthy."

No relief

Casino boosters equate slots parlors with tax relief, as the government would cut the wage tax using funds from a 55 percent tax on gambling revenues. But that means we must feed the slots almost $2 for every $1 in tax cuts. What sort of tax relief is that?

The numbers are even worse when the hidden costs are factored in. For example, most slots players in Philadelphia would be local residents, losing money they otherwise might have spent elsewhere in the city. Every dollar lost in a slot machine is a dollar not spent on restaurants, retail stores, and other businesses that are essential to the health of our community.

And the city would have to shell out big money to keep up with increased rates of crime and a spike in gambling addiction, bankruptcies, and other problems that inevitably worsen in areas where casinos open. No wonder the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority has warned that two slots parlors in Philadelphia could result in a net loss of jobs and an increase in the city deficit.

Up to us

The politicians want to hide these realities and ram the casino express into town before residents know what hit them. They hope to hurry pro-casino legislation through City Council and pretend the casinos are a done deal.

The politicians are mistaken. There is plenty of time for citizens to derail this fiasco by demonstrating, through our words and deeds, that slots parlors in a major city are not a solution to economic problems.

State-sponsored gambling represents a failure of integrity on the part of officials we dared to trust. Flip-flopping politicians don't represent the will of the people, and neither does the casino-boosting governor or the legislators making bogus threats to punish our city if it blocks the casinos.

We can stop the casino express before it rolls into Philadelphia — by fighting it in the courts, in City Hall, and anywhere else necessary. The day we stop it will be a day to celebrate the fact that power ultimately rests with the people, not the politicians.

Why is the mayor abandoning the mission of protecting the public?

Casino-Free Philly — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 22:52:08 +0000

In response to the Daily News story about Mayor Nutter's statements in regard to welcoming predatory gambling:

What happened to protecting the general public from the ill effects of individual behaviors like smoking in bars, restaurants and other public places? Mayor Nutter championed the ban on smoking to mitigate the dangers of second hand smoke. Why abandon this mission of public protection when it comes to predatory gambling and its second hand effects? In addition, where are the studies that will clearly show the cost of the slots parlors to the taxpayer? Revenue from gaming is one side of the equation what is the cost. Show us the cost. Prove to the general public that bringing predatory gambling to any neighborhood in the city will produce enough revenue to merit the cost in real dollars lost to local businesses, in programs to assist those who fall into an addiction and to aiding the families of losers.

Rev. Robin Hynicka

Arch Street United Methodist Church

No Casino in the Heart of the City Coalition

What about safety of Center City casino?

Casino-Free Philly — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:00:24 +0000

Editor:

There simply can't be any safe reason for a casino to be built in Center City. The operation would require a stunning number of security personnel.

With 24-hour operation, it'll be open season for the criminal element to stalk patrons, putting senior citizens most at risk.

There is no city that has a casino at such a site. New Orleans is closer to the river and surrounded by wide streets. Even then it's not the best location. Have we researched other cities that have casinos about the impact of such a plan if they go the route now proposed for Center City?

Add to that the brutal traffic tie-ups (during and long after construction), and you can't imagine a more disturbing proposition.

Casinos by rivers and outside business districts are better equipped to handle traffic and to police areas for the safety of patrons and all other visitors.

This idea seems to be one designed by blind ambition rather than thoughtful consideration.

Sigmund G. Morawski, Abington

Casinos and video poker is PA solving its fiscal problems on the backs of the poor and addicted

Casino-Free Philly — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 12:49:23 +0000

Editor:

Gov. Rendell's proposal to provide tuition aid by legalizing video poker in restaurants, bars and private clubs represents a vast broadening of Pennsylvania's efforts to solve its fiscal problems on the backs of the poor and addicted - and is perhaps an end run around Philadelphia's resistance to housing two slots parlors.

Allowing totally unregulated slots that people can easily walk to should not concern just the individuals and families whose lives might turn into shambles, but also the taxpayers, who will have to pick up the bill for the resulting social costs and the bureaucracy to support this extension.

Norma Van Dyke Philadelphia

What saddens me most is the defeatism and desperation casinos represent for the city

Casino-Free Philly — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 02:20:36 +0000

Editor:

In response to "Meet Your New Neighbor," Philadelphia Citypaper, Jan. 7, 2009:

Beyond the usual (but very significant) woes of addiction, crime, noise, pollution, corruption, congestion etc. associated with casinos, what most saddens me about the possibility of bringing casinos to Philly is the defeatism and desperation that it represents. It's hard to imagine (at least for me) a more profoundly uncreative and unproductive solution to budget deficits, diminishing tourism, or lack of jobs. Why can't we at least try to invest in constructive, profitable industries and businesses — more grocery stores, for example, or public transit projects — rather than black holes of vice? Does anyone in the city, excepting those with a financial interest in them, actually WANT these casinos? Do our politicians (Nutter especially) not recall what happened to Atlantic City, as a city, when the casinos came? Is that what we want for Philly?

Sin taxing – e.g. increasing taxes on cigarettes — is never a sustainable, productive solution. And plunking down casinos in Philly (America's "Next Great City" — anyone remember that?) will not accomplish anything except depressing the city's psyche and casting a dark shadow over the city's real cultural offerings. Maybe in years to come I'll be proved wrong, but I don't see New York, Chicago or Boston resorting to this "solution" — why should Philly have to?

Marc E. Keller
Society Hill, Phila.

Historian: State-sponsored predatory gambling antithetical to democracy

Ivan — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 01:28:28 +0000

People in Philadelphia are against casinos for many reasons. One reason is that predatory gambling fundamentally threatens the most important founding principles of our American democracy, sharply undermining the principles of equal citizenship, self-government and accountability. On September 26-27, 2008, several members of the leadership of Casino-Free Philadelphia participated in the annual convention of the national anti-casino group Stop Predatory Gambling, which was held in National Harbor, Maryland. During dinner on the first evening, we were treated to a keynote address by Mr. Taylor Branch, the world-renowned historian and an author of many books, including the Pulitzer Prize-winning trilogy "America in the King Years," which is widely considered the definitive history of Martin Luther King, Jr. and the civil rights movement.

Introducing Mr. Branch was our very own Daniel Hunter, a co-founder of Casino-Free Philadelphia. The theme of the presentation is that state-sponsored predatory gambling is antithetical to the core values of democracy and equal citizenship. Please take about 20 minutes and watch this video. We are pleased to note that two days after giving this speech Mr. Branch accepted the special Dayton Literary Peace Prize for Lifetime Achievement.

Taylor Branch speaks about predatory gambling from Casino-Free Philadelphia on Vimeo.

The most important message is that we're ready to take action

Lily — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:19:24 +0000

I'm a 4+ years resident of Pennsport in South Philly, and before that Bella Vista for over 10 years, so I have a great fondness for South Philadelphia and all the culture and neighborhoods and mix of people around here. Where I live now is about three and a half blocks from the proposed site for Foxwoods Casino. Need I say more?

I went to the site reclamation training on Saturday August 9th, run by Casino-Free Philadelphia, to learn more about how to stage a non-violent protest. The training started at Old Swedes' Church, where Daniel Hunter and George Lakey did a terrific job of running the session. They explained the process of staging a protest, gave some history of creative protests around other issues in the past, as well as some of the history of the anti-casino movement's efforts so far. We talked about what might happen if we end up having to do a direct action at the Foxwoods site, and then we did a practice protest in the church.

The outline was for the concerned citizens to have a big picnic on the construction site, to show up with blankets and picnic baskets and whatever games or toys one might bring to a picnic, and set up on the land that was promised to Foxwoods without our consent. I volunteered to play the part of one of the police officers, figuring it wouldn't be a popular role so I'd step up, not realizing that we were going to have to pretend to arrest the demonstrators if they didn't disperse, so I started to feel like it was the most exciting part to play. I have to admit to a certain feeling of importance and pride to be a pretend authority figure. It was interesting to play that part, I actually found myself frustrated when the protesters didn't do as we instructed, and I was wishing I didn't have to arrest anyone, especially a nice-looking lady in a sun hat who said she wasn't looking for trouble.

Once we ended the practice protest, and discussed what we'd learned from it, we went outside and walked to the actual proposed site for Foxwoods Casino at Columbus and Reed Streets, across from the UArts Movie Theater. There we performed another practice demonstration, this time with policemen and liaisons watching and videotaping, and more press than had been present at the church.

What I didn't realize till the whole thing was over was that it wasn't just a training session, it was in itself direct action - this very public and well-publicized 'practice' was meant to show the casino builders and the members of city and state government who are behind the waterfront casino sites that we the citizens of Philadelphia who don't agree are not going away, we will continue to protest and object to their plans. And participants were trained in how to go about this in the meantime. Kind of two birds with one stone.

I was videotaped and photographed by police and press along with 25 or so other Philly folks, and according to Sunday's Philadelphia Inquirer article, there was a chance we could have been arrested yesterday, for practicing a protest! I'm not buying it, I think the reporter was trying to make it sound like we were out there to cause trouble or vandalize the site or something (this has been confirmed by Casino-Free Phila, I was told by one of the organizers that there was no actual danger of being arrested on Saturday). And though the Philadelphia Inquirer article uses words like "interfere with" "stymie" and "disrupt" for the tactics we were learning, to me it felt more like what we were practicing was creating a visual message to the city of what we think that land should be used for - public recreation.

We talked about picnic blankets and whether or not to offer the construction workers popsicles, not chaining ourselves to fences and shouting angry slogans - not that there's anything wrong with that, that's just not what we were doing in this instance.

PlanPhilly said in their article that there were 40 of us. I think the Inquie is closer to the truth on that point... though according to several seasoned protesters present at the training, many successful protest movements happen from meetings of a half dozen people, so the 25-30 of us that were there constituted a great turnout - and by the way, there were a handful of participants who live in other parts of the city or even in outlying areas, but they recognize the potential negative results for the entire region if these casinos are built, so that was heartening to me to get support from people who don't live in the direct vicinity of the casino sites. Also, the photo that PlanPhilly put at the top of their story is not from yesterday at all, the protesters in the photo are carrrying a big banner, and if you look closely, they're wearing long pants and jackets - it's not even the right season. We weren't carrying banners, we were carrying inflatable beach balls.

Maybe whoever wrote the article for PlanPhilly was trying make us look more like a force to be reckoned with, and that could be a good thing, but I thought it would be better to show elders in straw hats, and young people blowing bubbles, cuz that's more what our crowd looked like. To me that's part of the point: it's not just angry people ready to get arrested, it's normal everyday people who just want a say in this major issue affecting their city.

But I guess the most important message is that we're ready to take action.

Valerie Keller
Pennsport in South Philly

We the people don't want casinos

Lily — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:13:52 +0000

Listen to an interview with Andrea Preis

I seem to always be angry about something these days — if it's not the war in Iraq, it's sub-prime lending; if it's not the 76ers, it's the high price of pizza. There's always a new issue in the shadows waiting to jump out and drive me crazy. But few things have pushed my buttons like the issue of the casinos and the sneaky way the legislation was passed. We the People don't want them and especially not in the neighborhoods that were chosen as sites, one of which happens to be MINE!

Luckily, I found out pretty quickly about Casino-Free Philadelphia. I signed up for a trip to Harrisburg to demand access to the documents of the proceedings which led to the decision to have casinos here in Pennsylvania; you know, transparency, the citizens have the right to know what's going on. We arrived at the statehouse, a noisy and enthusiastic group and read our demand to the powers that be, but they weren't having any of it: NO WAY were they going to let us have the information. The chairman (or king) of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control (or out of control) Board wouldn't even come out of his office to talk to us, and some of us were arrested. Citizen's right to access information disregarded, citizen's right to voice opinion denied, citizen's right to participate in democratic process refused.

In the following months our elected officials and, worst of all, our Supreme Court continued to place obstacles in our path, the media ignored us and often sided with the bad guys, in a co-ordinated effort to shut us up. But that wasn't going to happen. We kept on attending important meetings, demanding our right to be heard, and succeeded to persuade most of our city officials to do right by us. Even the newspapers started showing us some respect. We occupy the moral highground: casinos are bad for communities and will cost the city more in damage control than they will contribute in profit.

So what happened to We the People? We are alive and well at Casino-Free Philadelphia. I, personally, have gained a sense of empowerment, and discovered that I can articulate my (our) concerns (talk really loud in public places if that's what it takes to make myself heard). I can interrupt anyone who is talking crap; I can question anyone who isn't making sense; and I can call anyone a liar who is, well, lying. I don't have to smile and nod politely in agreement with people who are trying to harm me, my neighborhood, and my community. I am a citizen, resident, taxpayer, and voter and I must insist on my right to be heard if I want to preserve our democracy.

By persisting in our hard work under the enlightened guidance of our very savvy leaders, Jethro and Daniel, we will win this battle. I have no doubt about that. Then I'll have one less thing to be angry about.

Mayor Nutter speaks against Foxwoods

Lily — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:07:42 +0000

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter spoke out against the Foxwoods site at the city council rules committee meeting hearing on April 4, 2008. Watch the video here:

The costs of casinos for Philadelphia

Lily — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:07:09 +0000

Andalusia Knoll of Free Speech Radio News reports on the costs of casinos in Philadelphia. She talks about the report "You Pay Even if you Don't Play" and interviews community members and organizers from Philadelphia. Listen here:

Widening streets and demolishing houses

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:58:31 +0000

Casino-Free movement unifies neighborhoods

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:58:09 +0000

'A no-brainer': You can't site a casino so close to homes

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:57:28 +0000

Also see Andrea Preis' essay, "We the people don't want casinos."

If it's ugly, I don't want to live here

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:56:50 +0000

“It saddens me that if they do come, I’ve accepted in my own mind that I’m willing to leave. ... Since I’ve lived here so long, I’ve literally connected to the building. But I’ve accepted the fact that if it’s ugly, which it probably will be, I don’t want to live here.” —Fritz

Casino in the neighborhood? Are they crazy?

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:55:44 +0000

A real lesson in how dirty Philadelphia politics can be

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:54:17 +0000

I'm not willing to take that gamble on casinos

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:52:53 +0000

Tax revenue isn't a justification for trampling all over democracy

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:52:18 +0000

The enormity of what this could do to the neighborhood changed my mind

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:51:40 +0000

How would Gov. Rendell like a casino 196 feet from his house?

Casino-Free Philly — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:50:47 +0000

Addiction counselor: Addiction rates double when a casino is nearby

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:12:00 +0000

On Tuesday, March 11, 2008, panelists gave testimony about their experience with the hidden costs of casino slot parlors. Tina DiSanto, an addiction counselor, testified that national addiction rates for gambling were twice as high when a casino was within 50 miles.

Gambling addict: Nearby casino enabled an ongoing addiction

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:11:10 +0000

On Tuesday, March 11, 2008, panelists gave testimony about their experience with the hidden costs of casino slot parlors. Joe, a gambling addict, testified about his increased use of casinos when one was built close to his home.

Real estate agent: Casinos undermine values of houses

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:10:29 +0000

On Tuesday, March 11, 2008, panelists gave testimony about their experience with the hidden costs of casino slot parlors. Kathy Conway, a real estate agent in South Philadelphia, testified that housing value and demand had fallen since the casino development was announced.

Labor leader: Casino development will come at the expense of industrial jobs

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:09:16 +0000

On March 11, 2008, five panelists gave testimony about their experience with the hidden costs of casino slot parlors. Jim Paylor, the vice president of the International Longshoremen's Association, testified that the development of casinos will negatively impact workers at the docks, many of whom would lose their jobs as a result.

Economics professor: Casinos would create desire for gambling addiction

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:01:31 +0000

On March 11, 2008, five panelists gave testimony about their experience with the hidden costs of casino slot parlors. David George, an economics professor at LaSalle University, testified that the presence of casinos in close proximity to residential neighborhoods would alter individuals' desires for a better life, and promote gambling addiction.

Why the chosen casino sites are bad for Philadelphia

Lily — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:10:11 +0000

I live at 114 Federal Street - a two minute walk from the proposed Foxwoods Casino. I am totally opposed to any casino being sited in any densely populated urban neighborhood. It is a recipe for disaster.

My immediate neighborhood was originally part of the Village of Southwark in the 18th century. Over the centuries, it saw some great times and some tough times. It is now a thriving, diverse and trendy city neighborhood. It is a mix of restored historic homes, totally renovated homes, and completely new upscale homes. New restaurants continue to open in the area and are packed. Our historic neighborhood park (Jefferson Square) is getting renovated to be similar to Rittenhouse Square, largely due to the efforts of many new residents working to further improve our community. Similar projects and organizations are at work in our neighborhood libraries, parks and playgrounds. We are walking distance to center city. It is a vibrant and exciting place to live.

My historic home was built in 1790 by Benedict Arnold's father-in-law. I am a CPA. My neighbors include doctors and lawyers that had wonderful new houses built on my block. Our block is a nice blend of new and old homes and the neighbors are great. The casinos have told us we need them because our neighborhood is blighted and our community needs the jobs they offer. My neighborhood is clearly NOT blighted and I doubt very much that my neighbors and I will be quitting our careers to wait tables or clean bathrooms at Foxwoods. In fact, Foxwoods will destroy everything that is great about our neighborhood by creating Casino Blight.

Casino Blight is not a "what if" worry but is certain because of the poor sites chosen. The casinos will create a level of traffic and crime and other problems that will substantially reduce the quality of life. Our supermarkets and stores will close. Traffic will be horrible. Crime will rise. Home prices will drop. Those who can afford to will move. The residential area around the casinos will slowly become a slum.

While the residential area declines, the casinos will be profiting. Like all casinos, they will then need to expand to compete with other casinos. They will approach the city with an offer to buy up the areas they blighted under the banner of urban renewal, or simply buy up the properties one-by-one, raze the neighborhoods, and expand. Like Atlantic City and other cities, the city taxpayers pay for much of this casino expansion work.

In the meantime, with Atlantic City casinos losing money due to competition, how long will it be before New Jersey will allow casinos to be built directly across the Delaware River in Camden to compete with Foxwoods and Sugarhouse? Possibly promoted as NJ's urban renewal efforts to improve Camden. Many states have already positioned casinos on their borders to compete with the state next door, only to learn (duh) that there is a limited number of people to go to casinos, and the more casinos you built, the thinner you spread a limited number of casino patrons among a growing number of casinos. This makes each casino lose more. The only course of action is continuous expansion to lure back lost casino patrons to your bigger competitors. The landlocked Foxwoods site does not allow the casino to expand as it will eventually need to.

Casino opposition is not just about saving one or two city neighborhoods. There are many other enormous ongoing costs to the entire city being ignored.

New businesses will be frightened off. For many years the city negotiated and work very hard to get the great new shopping centers built along Delaware Avenue. Big businesses like Ikea, Wallmart, Loews, Home Depot and many others agreed to come and invest millions and create jobs. Placing the casinos on the waterfront will destroy those businesses and they will move. This tells all future businesses considering a city location that the city can not be trusted and will take any deal that comes along, even if you get screwed. Locating casinos on the waterfront is a hard slap in the face to those businesses who we begged to locate here. Shame on Mayor Street and the city's Chamber of Commerce for supporting casinos and thereby snubbing those businesses who have already invested so much in our city at their urging.

Then there are the huge unknown costs to the city for infrastructure, public transportation, airport expansion, crime and traffic issues, among others. No one even knows what these costs are, but many existing studies clearly indicate that these costs will far exceed any tax revenue we will get from the casinos. I am glad our current Mayor Nutter has requested a study of his own to gather these key financial facts. Shame on Mayor Street for irresponsibly ignoring them.

Another outrage is how these casinos do business. Please let us not forget those of us who signed casino opposition petitions were visited by casino-appointed thugs at our very front doors and threatened with legal action. Also remember that these sites were forced on us against our will and the casinos immediately go to court to stop any action we take to force a more thoughtful look at more appropriate sites. Shame on the casinos for behaving like mobsters, suppressing public opinion and not seeking better sites on their own as they should have been doing all along.

And here's the point that bothers me the most. Our governor has chosen to patently dismiss all these valid concerns and ignore the voice of the people in this matter. He believes he has been elected Monarch and as His Subjects we must obey. To make his will known, he influenced the state courts to rule in his favor. He has bullied, strong-armed and possibly threatened many officials into supporting his position on this matter. He appointed a gaming board that was clearly biased and sanctioned a fast-and-dirty site location process. He ignored all outcry for public input into one of the single biggest things that will shape Philadelphia's future. Shame on our Governor Rendell for continuing to stubbornly insist on casino sites that will destroy our city instead of benefitting it. For ignoring us and forcing his will upon us, he is clearly a Traitor to The People.

What about the local casino investors? Think about it, these people are our neighbors - they live in the Philadelphia area. We may pass them on the street or sit in a theater or restaurant next to them and not know it. They watch the same news broadcasts and get caught in the same traffic as we do. And they clearly would not want casinos in their own neighborhoods. They are people of great power, influence and philanthropy and have a strong influence in Philadelphia's future. I am hoping that these neighbors will reconsider and choose more socially responsible investments for their foundations to invest in. Over time, casinos will destroy whole neighborhoods, will force thousands of families to relocate, will devalue thousands of homes and will destroy the lives of many people. There is therefore nothing socially responsible, neighborly or "charitable" about a foundation investing in casinos. Besides, casinos look like a very bad long-term investment anyway. It's not too late dear neighbors, pull your money out! Remain true to the charitable motives of your foundations and consider socially responsible investments instead.

The only positive thing about this whole terrible situation is that it has united thousands of people in a positive common cause - to save great city neighborhoods and spare the city from financial ruin. I am proud of our political leaders who defied Traitors Rendell and Street and instead stood by us - The People. Thank you Councilman DiCicco, the entire City Council, State Rep. Michael O'Brien and everyone else who continues to Fight To Re-Site!

Tom Ferrick was bored

Lily — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:52:17 +0000

Tom Ferrick was bored. Released from a year’s constraint of promoting the City for the Great Expectations series, he wanted to have some fun. So he (publicly; twice) placed his bet that casinos would be a winner for Philadelphia and stood back to enjoy the uproar which ensued.

True, he says, the vulnerable will be sacrificed (but that’s not unusual in our society); the proposed buildings are ugly and in the wrong place, but casinos will provide jobs, and,--best of all-- reduce business taxes. He doesn’t bother to mention that all independent experts forecast that casinos will be economic losers. That’s probably because he read the Inquirer survey regarding the over-expansion of the convention center which found that nobody, who really matters, cares that it may well be a money loser in the long run. The business community wants its’ fix. Fly now, pay later.

So who will really be the winner of the casino gamble? I bet on the investors. Anybody who wants to put money down that I’m wrong, contact me at the e-mail address below.

Norma Van Dyke

Economic impact statements: long on promise for projects that are short on delivery

Lily — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:51:08 +0000

Yogi Berra would say “Deja vu all over again” to the Inquirer articles on the overstated benefits of the convention center expansion. The Inquirer published similar articles after the stadiums were funded with city taxes that would have been better spent on tax reform or the schools. Yet, the Inquirer has never questioned the economic impact of a project before it was a done deal.

Over the past 30 years I have done economic policy analyses and I have examined economic impact statements written in support of projects. I have yet to read one that does not overstate the benefits. After all, these documents are written to sell projects.

The economic impact statement for the shipyard had no meaningful statement of benefits and we are now in the position where the shipyard stymies expansion of the airport; a true economic engine for the region. The economic impact statement by the Army Corps of Engineers for deepening the channel in the Delaware presumed that reducing the amount of crude oil that had to be offloaded from tankers would generate enough cost savings to pay for the deeper channel. I was part of the study team at the company that transported the offloaded crude. We found that the same number of trips would be required and that claims of savings are bogus. Separately, the Government Accountability Office concluded that this project would return only $.42 per dollar spent and has cited it as an example of government waste. Stadiums just divert recreation dollars from other recreational activities and don’t add jobs, as we have found with the last round of stadium construction.

The stadiums illustrate another point about the standard economic impact studies: they never point out the lost opportunity of using the site for something else. Warehouse jobs were lost to make room for the stadiums. We are now risking the jobs at the food distribution center because the stadium locations would have been the best sites for a new facility and there are no other good locations in South Philly.

So, should we believe the casinos claims before the casinos are built?

I have looked at the casinos’ claims. They are long on promise but will be short on delivery.

First, SugarHouse claims its average wage will be $40,000. Yet, Foxwoods says its average wage will be half that of SugarHouse. Since a casino is a casino and they both use the same technologies, I suspect Foxwoods is right.

Now let’s examine the claims that casinos will add jobs to the city. Managing a regional economy is like filling a bathtub with the drain open. To grow, you have to pour water (dollars) in faster than the water (dollars) drains out. That is, economic growth comes from getting new dollars from elsewhere to be spent in the region to pay for what the region buys from elsewhere, which the now-closed factories did admirably.

Do casinos open to faucet and fill the tub or do they open the drain and empty the tub? This depends on where the casino revenues come from and how much of that revenue is spent locally. Casinos spend $.27 of every revenue dollar locally, according to Foxwoods. For the city to gain jobs, at least 73% of the casino revenues have to be new dollars coming from outsiders, not dollars diverted from other recreational activity. Anything less than 73% means the bath tub empties and the city loses jobs.

These casinos are designed to serve convenience gamblers. Since convenience gamblers go to the closest casinos and the city is bracketed on the north and south by slots parlors, the main customers of the city slots are city residents. The tourists they draw will be tourists who are coming to Philadelphia anyway, which means more losses for local businesses. If you look at the decline in slots revenue in Atlantic City in comparison to the revenues generated by the operating slots parlors in PA, at best a third of the revenue in the PA slots is diverted from Atlantic City.

Starting with Foxwoods’ own economic impact statement, my analysis shows that casinos will take out more money than they will bring into the local economy. This will cost the city 3900 jobs. The casinos add 1500 jobs and the neighborhoods lose 5400 jobs. Those selling casinos tout the jobs added but never mention the jobs that disappear.

The recent Penn Praxis study shows the potential of the waterfront to create a better city that draws in new residents and economic activity. Since the gamblers in Chester are undeterred by playing the slots next to a prison, why waste the valuable waterfront on slots parlors that would do just as well on the Automall? The lost opportunities for quality waterfront development from siting the casinos on the river make them an even bigger negative beyond what my analysis shows.

What about the promised wage-tax cut?

Governments that share their revenues with other governments have a long history of turning off the tap when their revenues fall short. We can expect the state legislature to cut expenditures from general revenues for schools as soon as state tax revenues slow down. The legislators will point to gambling revenues to justify their cuts. This has happened in other states with casinos.

Revenues in casinos are high for the first couple of years and then fall as the gambling addicts, who can represent up to half of casino revenues, tap out and go bankrupt. Consequently, expectations of the long run revenue are almost assuredly optimistic.

Little by little, the gambling revenues will be diverted for pet projects. Already, a slice is going to “economic development.” The overvalued convention center, about which the Inquirer has expressed so much angst, gets a large chunk of these funds. Taxes will have to be raised, just like the DRPA bridge tolls will be raised to cover DRPA’s “economic development” expenditures.

Furthermore, the city will have to cover the social costs of pathological gambling. PICA says, “Even on the low end of the estimated cost per pathological gambler, […] the costs would be close to $200 million.” Add to that the extra costs of policing and the city budget breaks.

How long can we remain fools?

If city officials and the Inquirer continue to leave unchallenged the economic impact statements of interested parties, then Abraham Lincoln was right when he said, “you can fool some of the people all of the time.”

Frederic Murphy
Fox School of Business and Management, Temple University

For someone who solicited our 'great expectations,' his own seem to have been lowered

Lily — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:04:31 +0000

To the Editor:

As a civic leader on the central Delaware, Tom Ferrick’s column “Why casinos won’t ruin Philadelphia or riverfront” was a disappointment, especially considering his previous encouragement to have ‘Great Expectations’.

Recent developments on the riverfront have been encouraging. City, state and local leaders collaborated to produce the Civic Vision for the Central Delaware. We developed guidelines for development based on civic principles reflective of what we loved about our city. The application of these guidelines would reconnect Philadelphia's riverfront with the city as development occurs.

Most importantly, it established a new way of doing business for Philadelphia. Stakeholders worked together in an open process that included over 4,000 Philadelphians to shape and vet the plan. The culimination of this work was a public presentation attended by over 1500 Philadelphians. The details of the plan can be seen atwww.planphilly.com/vision.

A thriving urban riverfront is key to Philadelphia’s future success at attracting jobs, residents and maintaining public health. The casinos can be part of that future, if they are integrated into the city in an urban, healthy way. The casinos as currently designed have parking structures and parcel sizes which wall off the riverfront and don’t acknowledge their riverfront location.

It shouldn't have to be a choice: Philadelphia can have successful gaming as well as thriving neighborhoods. Elected officials should develop a timeline and process for exploring resiting the casinos. Promising options exist and a process supportive of evaluating and implementing those options must be developed, endorsed and demanded by the City, and State. Whatever the eventual relocations of the casinos brings, clearly the developments will be much better accepted if they are developed in a way that is urban, walkable, and reflects the best of Philadelphia’s built environment.

It’s troubling to see someone who solicited our ‘Great Expectations’ to have lowered his so suddenly.

Jeff Rush
Central Delaware Advisory Group

Get with it, Tom

Lily — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:01:49 +0000

To the Editor:

How sad: Tom Ferrick, paragon of "civic journalism," guardian of Great Expectations, parroting discredited casino PR in his apologia for Waterfront slots casinos (Sun. Dec. 16).

Ferrick mocks casino critics as "nuts" and "crazy.” But one has to wonder where Ferrick's own head is when he claims gambling – legalized in the middle of the night, without hearings, via a 145-page amendment to a 33-line horse racing bill – came to Pennsylvania in an open, democratic fashion. Or when he ignores the PA Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority's warning that casinos could cost Philadelphia $200 million a year. Or when he ignores the fact that there’s no traffic study accounting for two casinos on the waterfront.

Most of all, one wonders what rock Ferrick’s been hiding under for the last year, when 26 civic associations, serving 250,000 Philadelphians, joined with elected officials not to vilify or stop casinos, but to move them away from our homes, schools, and houses of worship.

The experts and scholars agree: casinos’ negative impacts intensify – and cost cities more – the closer they are to communities. No one has ever contemplated putting casinos this large so close to neighborhoods this dense. It’s an experiment, and Ferrick should be grateful our city’s taxpayers refuse to be guinea pigs so the Sprague, Rubin, and Snider family foundations can get rich.

In Northern Liberties, we’ve welcomed $2 billion worth of Delaware Ave. development; we need Sugar House like a hole in the head. In South Philly, the port industry is set to create tens of thousands of new jobs – the kind of industrial boom Ferrick claims can’t happen here. All we have to do is make sure we don’t do anything stupid – like putting a casino in the proposed Foxwoods location where it would jam truck routes connecting the port to the region.

This fight isn't about the evils of gambling. It's about land use, smart development, and democracy - three things Ferrick suddenly seems to have become unqualified to discuss. Get with it, Tom: stop calling us names and help us relocate these casinos.

Matt Ruben
Northern Liberties

Tom: You agree with us!

Lily — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:00:44 +0000

Tom --

Hate to say this, but, you aren’t going to have an easy week – yet again!

To quote you, “…Traffic around them will be mucked up. There will be an increase in crime around the casinos. The casinos themselves are Grade B designs, in my view. I am not at all sure they picked the best locations on the waterfront from them.”

You agree with us! That’s exactly what the neighbors have been saying for over a year. Move the casinos to less onerous locations – away from any neighborhood in this great city. As I talk with friends throughout the state, I have yet to find one person who does not stare at me in disbelief when I tell them that casinos larger than the King of Prussia Mall might be built a field goal away from one neighborhood and a home run away from another neighborhood. Reasonable people intuitively know that casinos do not belong in neighborhoods. They don’t belong in anyone’s neighborhood. No way. No how.

As for whether casinos belong in Philadelphia at all, I would encourage you to take a hard look at whatever facts and figures you have been provided. Casinos are not the panacea they are touted to be. Talk – really talk – to the people who want to move the casinos. You will quickly discover that we are not “nuts”. Passionate, yes. But, not “nuts”. Wade through the emotions to get to the facts. Read about the impact of casinos to cities throughout the country who have tried this experiment. You know that significant problems follow in the wake of casinos. Why are you so sure that the neighborhoods most affected by the proximity of the proposed casinos can “absorb the shock of casinos” that you readily admit will result?

BTW, what do you make of legislation that protects a racino from other casinos by a 10-mile buffer, yet does not protect the citizens of the state from a casino by even an inch-buffer? A flawed law does not make good governance.

To quote you again, “I wish this city could draw a cleaner, less problematic business that would bring 7,000 – 12,000 new jobs are give us a major wage-tax cut in the bargain.” So, why haven’t we? Why can’t we? Why aren’t you pressing this issue in your columns?

This is not over.

Shirley Cook
Queen Village

Prove your opinions with research, Tom

Lily — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 19:35:01 +0000

Mr. Ferrick:

I am now calling you out in front of your editor. I hope this letter provides you with journalistic opportunities.

Prove the validity of your beliefs on the economic benefits of casinos. Prove it with research. Create a balance sheet, backed up with research, that shows how the +'s and -'s add up. Your opinion on casinos seems like it comes from 'the gut'. For checks and balances - do this research with a journalist whose 'gut' says casinos have no economic benefit for the City. Maybe an editor (Vernon?) could be the arbiter of the final balance sheet entry per item.

Of the $26.3MM dollars the city will receive in revenue per year from casinos - I estimate a minimum of $8.6MM (1/3 of the revenue) will immediately go to policing (see my email below). You can start the accounting debate right there.

Poor Tommy, you just can't figure out why people got so mean and rude to you. No one believes you actually care how we feel about you anyway - and that's only one of the many reasons why your lopsided attack riled up so many anti-casino riverward residents.

It's also your unsubstantiated opinions on casinos that created much of the dustup. The residents of Fishtown and Pennport lashed out at you because you couldn't care less about our quality of life. The thousands of people who live within 1500 feet of the these casinos and the 70,000+ who live within 1 mile - don't want to hear your moral rationalization re: city-wide 'absorption' of casinos.

Another reason that people lashed out at you is because you called anti-casino folk "nuts" and "crazy". Sunday's follow-up article tried to cover this up by saying you were referring to the protesters who want to break the law and participate in work stoppages. Too little , too late, Tom. We know how you look down on us. 99.5% of us will never break a law to stop the casinos. Nice try.

Finally - do you believe every job statistic the casino industry and the PGCB regurgitates in their press releases? Or, as a journalist - do you research the validity of those statistics? SugarHouse's website itself cites an NGISC study on gambling and crime. If one looks a little closer, the study says that in 1995 the casinos industry employed 300,000 people and an associated 400,000 indirect jobs in the U.S. If you use the NGISC's ratio of direct to indirect jobs - the total number of jobs you, the PGCB, and Foxwoods/SugarHouse cite is much, much lower in reality.

Only a lazy or inept journalist would accept the job numbers cited by the casino industry and the PA Gaming Control Board (which, at the time of licensing, was run by Tad Decker - whose law firm now represents 2 of the 5 stand-alone PA casinos).

In the meanwhile, Tom, change the name of your 'civic project' to "Low Expectations"...this new moniker suits the quality of your journalism and your view on the future of your City.

Prove me wrong, Tom. Back up your claptrap.

Bob Sola

Be the first journalist to thoroughly research the casino issue!

Casino-Free Philly — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:44:08 +0000

Mr. Ferrick-

First, I respect your right to the opinion that casinos will be good for the city. I read your article "Why casinos won't ruin Philadelphia or riverfront" - and I respectfully disagree with you. However, I do have two proposals for you that would be great journalism:

1) Be the first journalist to thoroughly research and weigh the economic costs of casinos v. the economic gains. Put it all on a balance sheet. See my email below.

2) Rent my house in Fishtown after I get married in March. Get the Inquirer to pay for it. Call it: "Reality Journalism". Then, you'll be able to accurately assess the effects of two Delaware Avenue casinos on Fishtown - by living there before and after they arrive. Move beyond merely 'doubting' casinos will be bad.

Commit to living in Fishtown for two years (6 blocks from from the SugarHouse Casino): 12 months before SugarHouse is fully operational and 12 months after it arrives. Then, you'll be able to accurately measure the validity of anti-casino river front residents' fears...and:
--you can document your drive times to/from the Inquirer building every day. I'll ask that you take 676 and 95 or Delaware Avenue home from Broad Street.
--you can compare Phila crime stats before and after (property crime, domestic calls, assault, drunk driving, etc).
--you can form relationships with pro- and anti-casino Fishtowners, and measure their feelings about casinos before and after they arrive.
--you can count the addition or loss of local businesses along Girard Avenue
--you can get to know local business owners and see how their 'bottom line' is affected by casinos (specifically: pubs, restaurants, coffee shops, and pizza shops)
--you can talk with pastors in the neighborhood and see what happens to their collection basket totals & if they report increased social and family problems
--you can document, by living in Fishtown, the +'s and -'s of living near a casino

Oh, and Mr. Ferrick, my second proposal is a "joke" - just like your "floating casino" laugh-riot. Because you know and I know it - you'd never want to live 6 blocks from a casino. You'd be "crazy" and "nuts" if you did.

Best,
Bob Sola

p.s. - Your analogy of the bustling port of yesteryear fails on multiple counts:
1) 50 years ago, most people in Fishtown and Pennsport walked to their jobs. They didn't have to worry about traffic gridlock.
2) If you know ANYTHING about Philadelphia's history - you'd know that neighborhoods grew around industries - not the other way around. In many cases, it was the employers themselves who constructed the homes for their workers. Today, it's the casino industry invading two established neighborhoods that are hundreds of years old.
3) Industry in Philadelphia didn't die with the Stetson hat. Recently, major industry is growing in Philadelphia: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/business_breaking/11883582.html . These are family-sustaining jobs - and they don't require 140 new police officers, they won't create traffic gridlock, they won't create social problems, and they don't cost the city a dime. They add and don't subtract.

Studies showing casinos improving the city's finances don't exist

Casino-Free Philly — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:44:08 +0000

Tom - I like reading your column. You believe that casinos will improve City finances. It is important to understand that that position is supported by no independent statistical studies; those studies do not exist. Additionally, the record is clear that the advent of casinos has not delivered meaningful tax relief to cities where that has been the sales pitch.

Temple mathematics professor Frederick Murphy testified before the City Council's Rules Committee that one casino alone would develop a minimum annual budget deficit of $30 million to the City from a net loss of jobs and other considerations. Other studies indicate significantly larger deficits.

I know Fred Murphy and I can assure you that his only agenda is the math. In the interest of fairness, I ask that you call Mr. Murphy and ask him for a brief meeting to discuss his study methodology and results. Alternatively, I'm sure that he would gladly provide you a written summary of his presentation before Council. His telephone number is 215.204.8189.

Bill Faust
Philadelphia

Transparent and playful in the righteousness of our cause

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:09:57 +0000

First, thanks to those who mobilized us: Anne, Jethro and Daniel. When I look back (at really 18 months) and ask what we have achieved and why, I think it can be attributed to the skillful harvesting of dormant uneasiness about what casinos would mean for Philadelphia and the transformation of that unease into a swelling chorus, which sang rather than threw stones. What I think we have "won" public sentiment and I think we have won it because we have been both transparent and playful in transmitting the righteousness of our cause.

The Supreme Court should get coal in their stockings

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:09:57 +0000

The past year has been such a roller coaster ride. I am happy to have met such dedicated people and also saddened to have learned that democracy has a different meaning in Pennsylvania. In the spirit of the holiday we should ask Santa for no casinos in residential neighborhoods and let the Supreme Court know that they are getting coal in their stockings.

Philadelphians really do have the power to move mountains

Casino-Free Philly — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:09:57 +0000

It's been quite a journey over the past year. I've met some of the most incredibly dedicated and passionate people. We've reminded ourselves that Philadelphians really do have the power to move mountains!

Former director of gambling research: Philadelphia not getting a good deal

Casino-Free Philly — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 13:21:09 +0000

Dr. Robert Goodman, former Director of US Gambling Research Institute, professor of economics at Hampshire College, testifies on June 13, 2007.

Dr. Goodman told Philadelphia City Council that casinos would find a way to move their slots parlors more than 1500' from residential communities and that he had seen other communities strike much better financial deals than anything discussed in Philadelphia so far. The Rules Committee was considering legislation which would have approved zoning for the proposed SugarHouse Casino in Northern Liberties and Fishtown.