- Is the number of branch libraries in Philly significantly out of line with cities of comparable size?
- Nutter Doesn't Have to Follow the Law says Seventy
- National Media Ridicule Nutter's $100 Million Casino Request as Pork
- What we Need from Harrisburg to Protect Low-Income Property Owners
- Local resistance to Israeli crimes
- Bulletin to Harrisburg: Philadelphia is Part of Pennsylvania
- Today's Email from Siobhan Reardon
- Seth Williams Office Opening Party: TODAY
- Hear, hear: Judge Fox's Order
- Bob Brady saves New Year's and the Mummers!
Casinos Must be a City Wide Effort
Submitted by Gaetano P. on Mon, 02/26/2007 - 3:41pm.
This weekend, I came to understand that Councilman DiCicco's zoning and land use bills related to casinos were having trouble getting out of committee. Apparently, 5 votes are needed and it is not certain that these votes will be there. As you are aware, I testified in favor of these bills last week and I still support them. But, there seems to be a reason why these bills are having trouble--the threat of casinos is not a city-wide fear, yet.
Both of the chosen sites and licenceses are located in our riverwards. The Delaware River Neighborhood Alliance, of which I am a part (along with Matt) boasts that it represents about 200,000 constituents through the varous neighborhood groups. That is a lot of people. Those groups, however, are concentrated along the river. We need to make this a city-wide issue, and quickly.
There are a few ways to do this, and it is likely the groups like Casino Free Philadelphia are already doing these things. But, again, I'm not sure. Let's open this up an toss around some ideas of what we can do to make this a Philadelphia-wide issue ASAP.
****Now, this post is not about Councilman Frank DiCicco, so please do not come on here and trash Frank. This post is about the nieghborhoods from Whitman to Kennsington--let's keep it like that.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Gaetano
Do you have any information on which names are associated with the missing votes?
At this point, I do not.
I would focus on all of the at-larges on that committee, except Kenney. And, Clarke.
Commerce and Economic Development
Is it the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development? Members are listed on the linked pages to narrow it down a little.
----
I support Michael Nutter for Mayor.
No. It is the Rules
No. It is the Rules Committee.
According to Donna Miller's office, for what it's worth
She is in support of the intention of the bill, but her support may be contingent on some of the details.
The thing is, how do you
The thing is, how do you make it a City Wide issue when the poeple who are against Casinos already have our votes and support?
Understand that friends come and go, but with a precious few you should hold on. Work hard to bridge the gaps in geography and lifestyle, because the older you get, the more you need the people who knew you when you were young. ~ Mary Schmich
I'm not entirely
I'm not entirely understanding your comment. Please explain.
Meaning that Frank cares
Meaning that Frank cares about it because it has to do with his district. Why should the other council poeple care, especially when it will get them no new votes, and might, possibly, lose them votes?
Understand that friends come and go, but with a precious few you should hold on. Work hard to bridge the gaps in geography and lifestyle, because the older you get, the more you need the people who knew you when you were young. ~ Mary Schmich
Well, it is also in Clarke's
Well, it is also in Clarke's district, border's Savage's district, is pretty close to Verna's district. And, related to the At-Large people, they need at least X amount of votes to win. We have to make these people care.
I'm asking, what do you propose the best way to get other communities to get behind this thing. Is it education, outreach, etc., that will do it.
Either way, this has to be done. Otherwise, it will be the Riverfront Communities who have to bear the brunt of casinos--and they do not want them.
In terms of facts, I can think of a number of reasons why council people should care. Just look at my testimony from earlier, those crime increases are county wide numbers! And, further, it will not just be Pennsport and Fishtown who pay the social costs of gaming--but the entire city.
We have to show that the economic benefits are nothing but myths. Development builds wealth, it does not take it away.
Yeah. I guess that my point
Yeah. I guess that my point was that I have no idea what we can do. I’m not saying that it is a losing battle, but it is one that’s uphill. It would mean getting Council people and Council Candidates on our side who aren’t already, and I think that that is an extremely hard thing to do.
Understand that friends come and go, but with a precious few you should hold on. Work hard to bridge the gaps in geography and lifestyle, because the older you get, the more you need the people who knew you when you were young. ~ Mary Schmich
I think one thing is, we
I think one thing is, we have to target residents and community groups in "disaffected areas" or those that are close enough to have issues. These benefits are myths--and people are buying them! I guess that is what frustrates me so much.
Ultimately, we are a city that needs job growth. But, at the same time, we cannot forsake the stability we have in some of these communities. The placement of these things are bad. I know some out there would be so very thankful for a $9.00 an hour job--but, we as a city cannot just take anything that comes and pays regardless of the effects. While we cannot be too selective, we can be smart. Port development may be a smarter way, same with dredging.
Yeah, I agree. The thing is
Yeah, I agree. The thing is that the people who we have to convince are not very sophisticated. And if you are out of work, your sense of pride shattered, then a crappy job is better than no job at all.
We need people who have ideas about honest to God job growth, so that we can have some pull when we say that we don’t need Casinos.
Maybe other communities just wont get behind it.....
I see your point Gaetano, and appreciate your frustration, but do you think its possible that the reason that DiCicco's bills have hit a wall in committee is because its simply not a city-wide issue?
Many people today still have a "Not in my back yard" attitude to development, and the folks who live in Rittenhouse, Graduate Hospital, West and North Philly and the Northeast simply dont care were the casinos go so long as their construction doesnt affect them. Is that a close-minded view? Maybe? Is it civic minded? No. Is it human nature? Absolutley.
I do not live in an area threatened by the casino construction, and honestly its not a big issue for me. Were they not built, however, I do think that Philly would suffer. Gov. Rendell, as I understand, has pleged money from the casino to be used for other civic projects. If your group is successfull in upsetting the casino's arrival, what happens to that funding? Do the citizens lost that revenue stream? Perhaps you can get more people on board with education, aimed not only at the issues involved but on the fiscal side of the equation; explain to people why losing the casinos will help them, not just socially but economically, and you might find more support.
City Wide Issue
If your looking for city wide support then you should try approaching civic associations . I'm part of one right in Frank's district yet not one representative has showed up to present their case and ask for a letter of support. Considering most civic associations represent around 10,000 residents plus local businesses, you would think this would be a priority for your efforts. There was one person who took an interest in showing up but then never followed up.
Civic Associations, if a
Civic Associations, if a 501c3, can not give a letter of support. It would violate their non-profit status to openly support a political candidate.
As far as I understand it.
It doesn't mean they can't come and talk to you.
Or that members of those
Or that members of those associations can do something. That is important, it is people we really need to get to.
Unless it is seen as a lobby
Unless it is seen as a lobby related to the purpose of the organization. There is no supporting of candidates here--just simply neighborhood preservation. 501's can do some things--but, you are correct--no candidate endorsement.
Correct
Correct we cannot back a candidate but this would be a letter of support for an issue.
looking at it in different ways
As someone who has been involved in the casino issue(s) for almost a year now I have learned just how complex this issue is. And as far as I know the referendum is not stuck. We have a hearing this Friday at 10 AM (please attend) and there is increasing momentum to have it passed. The casinos are much more than a development issue and although there is a lot of energy in the riverward neighborhoods to oppose the siting of casinos in neighborhoods I found the anger and frustration and interest in the issue in neighborhoods across the city while I was gathering signatures in the petition drive, how else do you think we collected 27,000 signatures in 20 days (most people I talked with were informed about the issue, had read about it in the media and were eager to sign). The casino issue is also much more than a neighborhood issue. It connects government reform and transparency issues, corruption and pay to play politics with issues such as public health, crime and safety in the city, historic preservation, planning, zoning and local control, environmental sustainability and much more. It is a challenging issue for our electeds not because it doesn't effect them but because their leadership, in Senator Fumo and Governor Rendell are so involved and there is palpable fear to do anything that would raise questions about the wisdom of gaming in PA and in Philly. But these questions must be asked by anyone concerned about the future of our city.
But let's not forget where this all started and how corrupt the process has been since the beginning. This started as a bill that passed after midnight in 2004 just as the pay raise did one year later (if the reform measures currently being discussed in Harrisburg were in place at the time we would not have the kind of gaming law we have now). All efforts to have meaningful input at the State level have been thwarted by the Gaming Control Board and most of the electeds who created it. If the City Council does not allow voters in Philadelphia to have some say in casino siting they will be implicated in this undemocratic process just as those at the State level are.
To date there has been no cost benefit analysis on jobs and other economic development issues as it relates to casinos, there has been no meaningful study that lays out the costs to city and state taxpayers in the form of increased crime, foreclosures and public health impacts. There are far better ways to expand job opportunities in the city (like expanding the port) and the tax revenue that is promised will be offset by revenue losses as people's discretionary (taxed) spending will move increasingly towards slots (another thing not studied yet). As someone who lives very close to the Sugar House site I have learned that despite the very real threat to my home and neighborhood the entire city will be harmed significantly if we don't control the casinos. So far government hasn't just opened our doors to this new industry, it has partnered with the industry and provided a buffer between the casino industry and the citizens. Let's open up the process and have a meaningful discussion about the future of our city and not let these decisions be simplified into just another development issue because casinos and the industry that owns them represents much more than that to our city.
Yes, but I think the point
Yes, but I think the point is this: there are 10 council districts and not all of them are affected by casinos (by affected I do not mean that they see them as economic development rather than the crap they are). To the extent any of these council people vote against DiCicco's bills or the referendum, the retribution may not be there UNLESS we can turn the heat up on those coucilpeople within their own districts. This is not challenger based either.
The point is--how do we do this and make all the points in your comment? Whatever the appeal made, an appeal has to be made on a city-wide basis. Plus, you would need 12 councilpeople to override a mayoral veto. It has seemed since day one that Street is very pro-casino.
And, I don't know what the situation is with the referendum, just the DiCicco bills.
that makes sense
Yes, we need to turn up the heat across the city something that is hard to do if we treat this as a development issue in just the neighborhoods where these are proposed now. The casinos will impact families, businesses and the politics of our city in the long term. We need to continue to grow our support across the city including amongst progressive Democrats who are increasingly seeing this as a reform (and other) issue. I really liked Ben Waxman's op-ed 10+ days ago for example. There are many other voices and interests still unheard on the issue and we are doing our best and of course can use support in the efforts to broaden our base. Let's make sure to get those people we know to write to their district councilperson (and at large), http://www.hallwatch.org/faxbank/casino_ballot_question, to demonstrate that we are united in our efforts to give Philadelphians a say on the issue.
Remember, those crime
Remember, those crime statistics we are looking at--they are county wide too.
Tom Knox has come out against the casinos.
And talks everywhere he goes about how bad they'll be for the city. I think most people still don't know what to think. They don't understand the social costs of crime and addiction, and they don't know what a strain they'll be on city resources.