RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
In this week’s podcast we sit down with Jon Myers and Chuck Hootman, founders of Casino-Free Columbus, the local grassroots effort to halt the development of the casino in the Arena District. Jon & Chuck tell us about how this movement came about, why the casino is not a good fit for our community, what types of development we need to be striving for instead and ways for others to get involved. More information can be found on their twitter profile @casinofreecolo and their Facebook page – “CasinoFreColumbus“.
You can use the player below to listen to the podcast, click here to download an mp3, click here to subscribe via iTunes, or click here to subscribe to the rss feed.
[audio:http://blip.tv/file/get/ColumbusUnderground-CUPodcast33CasinoFreeColumbus457.mp3]
yeah, i’m with neo, the tax money is a joke. take it.
Police coverage? Get a grip. Casinos have their own security. And JAL is right and has valid points. Plus the casinos are paying for the infrastructure. And whats’ w/ Daniel’s homophobic comments, getting a little tingly and disturbed by it?
Stay on topic please.
Everyone has their own opinion on the casino. I feel that Columbus will not lose anything by adding the casino to the Arena District..Even if it is built to only keep people inside at least its bringing more people downtown for 24 hour activity.
This concept of “increased police coverage” and the required cost is 100% bogus. There is no evidence of crime rate increases beyond what you would expect for increased population, and by that you’d have increased the police coverage when Nationwide Arena was build or any other attraction in the area.
People who don’t like this idea will continue to throw meaningless, unsubstantiated crap at the wall until something sticks.
Core_Models Says: This concept of “increased police coverage†and the required cost is 100% bogus.
If that’s your contention you may want to read a study by Earl L. Grinols and David B. Mustard entitled “CASINOS, CRIME, AND COMMUNITY COSTS”.
http://www.maine.com/editions/2006-05-15/images/20060531000107C.pdf
This is an excerpt of their conclusion. You can click on their full study.
Using data from every U.S. county
from 1977 to 1996 and controlling for over 50 variables to
examine the impact of casinos on the seven FBI Index I
crimes (murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary,
larceny, and auto theft), we concluded that casinos increased
all crimes except murder, the crime with the least obvious
connection to casinos. Most offenses showed that the impact
of casinos on crime increased over time, a pattern very
consistent with the theories of how casinos affect crime. The
crime-ameliorating effects of casinos through increased employment
opportunities and wages for low-skilled people
will be concentrated shortly after opening. Also, law enforcement
agencies can frequently use casino openings to
leverage greater immediate staffing increases, but are unable
to sustain this growth. This effect further reduces the immediate
impact of casinos on crime. However, over time
these effects are dominated by casino-related factors that
increase crime. Specifically, problem and pathological gamblers
commit crimes as they deplete their resources, nonresidents
who visit casinos may both commit and be victims
of crime, and casino-induced changes in the population start
small but grow. The data show that these crime-inducing
and crime-mitigating effects offset each other shortly after
opening, but over time the crime-raising effects dominate,
and crime increases in subsequent years. Furthermore, we
believe these estimates to be lower bounds on the true effect
because they omit measures of law enforcement, which is
typically increased substantially when casinos open. When
we include law enforcement measures, the estimated effects
are larger.
Thanks for the helpful research, patient_zero. What an excellent find. It looks like those of us who are interested in stopping Penn National from forcing the casino upon Columbus may very well have some real ammo to use from this study. I like that they even examined a comparison between casinos and other forms of tourist attractions:
[quote]Visitor Criminality: Crime may also rise because casinos
attract visitors who are more prone to commit and be
victims of crime. Chesney-Lind and Lind (1986) suggested
that one reason tourist areas often have more crime is that
tourists are crime targets. However, in the following section
we show that visitors to national parks do not increase
crime. Therefore, if casino visitors induce crime, it is
because they are systematically different from national park
visitors or visitors to other attractions.[/quote]
That alone ought to settle some dust here.
I also find it interesting that the researchers examined the impact casinos made upon their host cities over a period of time. If the Columbus casino were to actually open, which as of now is by no means a guarantee, we might not know its’ full field impact for at least five years. Yet the casino proponents sold people on the “quick fix” short-term economic development and “jobs, jobs, jobs” that Issue 3 would supposedly create. Talk about taking a gamble, pun intended.
So then, here’s the real question: Do a casino’s long term effects outweigh whatever possible short term benefits, if any, the initial construction and opening might bring to its host city? If we cannot individually and collectively answer this conclusively, and in Columbus’ favor, then we must use all means necessary to stop it from being built and inflicting harm upon our city and our region.
zero, that Mustard study is the ONLY study that supports crime rate increases and its been discredited so often its ridiculous.
#The number of police calls in Black Hawk, Colorado, increased from 25 a year before casinos to between 15,000 and 20,000 annually after their introduction. In neighboring Central City, the number of arrests increased by 275 percent the year after casinos arrived. In Cripple Creek, Colorado, serious crime increased by 287 percent in the first three years after casinos.
# In the first six years of casinos in Minnesota, the crime rate in counties with casinos increased more than twice as fast as in non-casino counties. According to an analysis by the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the median crime rate in casino counties rose 39 percent during that period as compared to an 18 percent increase in non-casino counties.
# The total number of crimes within a 30-mile radius of Atlantic City increased by 107 percent in the nine years following the introduction of casinos to Atlantic City.
# According to a study by Earl Grinols, a city can expect its crime rate to increase by about 8 percent after four or five years of introducing casinos.
# The Mississippi Gulf Coast experienced a 43 percent increase in crime in the four years after casinos arrived. Harrison County, where most of the Gulf Coast casinos are located, witnessed a 58 percent increase in total crimes between 1993 and 1996.
# A U.S. News & World Report analysis found crime rates in casino communities to be 84 percent higher than the national average. Further, while crime rates nationally dropped by 2 percent in 1994, the 31 localities that introduced casinos in 1993 saw an increase in crime of 7.7 percent the following year.
# 57 percent of 400 surveyed Gamblers Anonymous members admitted to stealing in order to maintain their gambling habits. “Collectively, they stole $30 million, for an average of $135,000 per individual.”
# The number of court cases filed in Tunica County, Mississippi, went from 689 in 1991, the year before casinos began operating there, to 11,100 in 1996.
More here: http://www.casinofreephila.org/research/gambling-and-crime#fn
“# According to a study by Earl Grinols, a city can expect its crime rate to increase by about 8 percent after four or five years of introducing casinos.”
That’s the Mustard study, his partner is Grinois. Again, debunked, and the reason its been debunked is the same reason that most of those other stats are meaningless. Routine activities theory pretty much disallows the ability to attribute these increases to casinos specifically. You know what was in a 30 mile radius of Atlantic City prior to casinos being built? Nothing and no one. Its like comparing the crime rate in Dublin 30 years ago when it was farmland and the crime rates today when it is actually populated and has financial activity. Meanwhile, for every city you can show an increase in crime you can also find one with a decrease, thus nullifying the stats (see Gary, Indiana).
As to the 57% of 400 surveyed from Gamblers Anonymous stealing…they’re in GAMBLERS ANONYMOUS…guess what, they’re there because they had a problem. I bet if you surveyed 400 members of Alcoholics Anonymous you would find out they’ve done some pretty dastardly things too, but it doesn’t mean we should re institute prohibition.
This was the problem with the Grinois/Mustard study all along, and why its been discredited.
p.s. YOu could use the same type of stats to argue against public transit being built, density in housing, etc.
“Routine Activities Theory” is……. a theory.
as is virtually everything you’ve posted, including all the conclusions from the much relied upon Grinois/Mustard study.
Do you want to see who can out Google who?
As I’ve said before Jon, my problem isn’t with you not wanting a casino here…my problem is with how you’re going about fighting it. Far flung accusations of political corruption, claiming all this end of the world disaster stuff, its all the same kind of tactics used by opponents of almost every issue I think you believe important.
If we don’t want to accept those tactics from them, I don’t feel we should use them ourselves when it suits us.
p.s. I haven’t been googling, I read the Grinois/Mustard study months ago when I was making up my mind on this issue.
How would you suggest we fight it?
With honesty and integrity, not using sky is falling unsupported scare tactics and baseless accusations of political corruption or predatory gambling practices.
Well, you’re entitled to your judgment on my honesty and integrity and you’re welcome to speculate on my motivations.
I can tell you I have absolutely nothing to gain either way by speaking out.
Some background to clear the air on crap I’ve been hearing. I’m not running for office. Ever. I’m an atheist. I’m as unelectable as it gets. Ask anyone who really knows me and they’ll tell you I don’t give a shit about this attention as well. It’s not my thing to beat the local drums for an issue.
Additionally my business interests aren’t really impacted either way by the casino.
I’ve spoken out because we’ve been handed a shitty deal. I’m infuriated that elected officials who represent the interests of the 58% of Central Ohioans who voted against it did little to nothing to fight for a better deal. Especially if we “have to have casinos” as an economic savior.
I happen to be in a position where I can speak my mind. I feel strongly about this issue and thus have chosen to act.
I’ve spent LOTS of time in cities with casinos. I’ve spent lots of time over time in cities with casinos. I’ve spent a lot of time in casinos. I’ve invested a fair amount of time researching the impact of casinos on a city just as you have. I’m convinced there is a direct correlation between the deal we’ve been handed, the casino that will be built and a resulting massive negative impact on downtown Columbus. You’re research has convinced you it won’t have that impact. Fine that’s your POV. I’m not convinced.
People I would normally never have spoken with have come out of the woodwork to stop the casino. Whether or not there turns out to be an increase in crime, bankruptcy, divorce, spousal abuse and suicide is beside the point. There is a perception held by a wide majority that there will be an increase. There is an opportunity cost and real financial cost attached to that perception.
I’ve spoken to three empty nesters recently who hold a perception of increased crime. They bought into Mayor Coleman’s downtown vision for the city, sold their house in the burbs and moved downtown. They’re all ready to move based on that perception. I suspect many might move.
That perception certainly won’t attract these empty nesters who are fueling downtown housing purchases. We’ve tied downtown economic development objectives to housing. It’s my opinion that the perceptions a casino bring will be a problem and hurt our urban objectives.
Sort of fuck up our “table image” if you will.
I honestly believe there was a large amount of political corruption and position collusion on ALL sides that contributed to the passage of Issue 3. That collusion led to personal financial gain for interested parties. That would be considered corrupt by most people.
I’ve been following the money, following the decisions and privy to private conversations that have lead me to that conclusion. It makes no sense to go public with the specifics because exposing that corruption is not our goal. The goal is to stop a casino from being built.
That said, Ohio is a swing state and I won’t forget this come next election. I suspect tens of thousands of other people who are pissed off won’t forget it either. In my mind this has national issue written all over it. I don’t want to go there.
Anyhow, the reason why I even mentioned corruption is to point out how I personally felt we got here in the first place. Again, you’re entitled to your opinion. If you’re saying it’s dishonest to say something I honestly believe so be it. That’s where I’m coming from straight from the heart, straight from the gut and straight from an informed sense of reasoning.
The bottom line one more time. I feel like we’ve been handed a really shitty deal and I hate getting fucked on a deal. I hate seeing a city that we’re all working to make better get fucked on a deal. I believe this casino, by this operator will be a huge negative for Columbus.
I’m speaking up. A lot of people agree. We’ve been fucked.
-j
COME ON COLUMBUS!
After moving here and realizing that the most common extra curricular activity is drinking and watching the Buckeyes. For a city of this size there should be a casino, there’s hardly anything else in Columbus. The downtown area needs SOMETHING. As a downtowner I rather have a lot more to do. Instead of just catering to the suburbanites and there silly weekend adventures to the city. The city obviously has been neglected to pursue billionaire dreams such as *cough* Easton and Polaris. Surburban hangouts with a pseudo-urban facade. This city needs to get it’s knickers together. We need to do something about the sad second rate museum. We need to build retail stores to cater to the new city dwellers occupying the new condos downtown. I don’t want to go to the congested, boring suburbs to shop. A casino could open the door to new developments downtown AND IT NEEDS IT! This is a issue for us city people to deal with and the suburbanites should mind their own utopias. The casino bill passed so DEAL WITH IT! This city needs something else then a place for surbanites to come and get drunk on the weekends, THANK YOU!
modart : “This city needs something else then a place for surbanites to come and get drunk on the weekends,”
I am really sorry you see Columbus that way. I do think it says more about you than about the city though. Nearly every day and doubly on weekends, I find there are just too many things to do that I have to miss out on and virtually none of them involve alcohol.
I am completely with Jon on this. We are tossing aside long-term and sustainable development in favor of a pipe dream. A casino might well have fit in with these plans, but certainly not one abruptly dropped by force. We have had steady progress on getting more people to live downtown. Imperfect, I will agree, but definite movement in the right direction. Putting a casino at its current planned location will toss all of that overboard – casinos simply do not fit into mixed-use development.
We have also hitched the wagon to one of the lowest and least trustworthy of casino developers. I am more upset that we so under-value the worth of our community and economic assets that we sold ourselves so short.
A.
I also see the city as sort of having a small town feel that lives for OSU Buckeyes..like I said before ANY development would be a boost for downtown.