OLG Toronto/GTA casino proposal (where to put it?)

[Hipster Duck]

This area is one of the few regions in the city where you can raise a family in a relatively affordable urban setting within walking and cycling distance from most amenities. And right now it is statistically speaking the safest neighbourhood in the city. People who live in these buildings recognise this, and that is why they overwhelmingly oppose the casino proposal. In other countries and cultures small condos are perfect places to raise a family.

I didn't grow up in the suburbs, the city is all I ever knew as home. The self-determination of urban neighbourhoods to determine what forces shape their nature is therefore sacred to me. Even then I didn't originally oppose the casino at first... in fact I rather liked the idea... it wasn't until months of digging up literature and talking to experienced planners and various stake-holders that I decided this was not the smartest choice for this part of town.

People here overwhelmingly support local independent retail, grocery stores, cycling facilities, transit, shopping malls, parking spaces, high-rises, pubs, cultural institutions, schools, statidums, etc. It's a very inclusive community, but its engaged citizens have decided to draw the line on the casino issue, and I believe the city should respect this.

I'm more in agreement with people like Tewder about what constitutes a real "neighbourhood" than you, but I will admit that parts of Cityplace - especially west of Spadina - are true residential neighbourhoods. Still, you have to admit that there's a psychological detachment between that part of Cityplace and where the casino is going. You can't really say that it's part of the same neighbourhood and even if crime and vice spill out of the casino, the odds of that crime and vice making it over to the residential parts of Cityplace are slim to none.

I don't live at Cityplace, but I used to live in a "neighbourhood" that was even less residential, more central and more mixed use. I lived at RoCP. When I lived there, I had no attachment whatsoever to the community around me, and I'm generally a communitarian/eat local/drink local kind of guy. What was there to be attached to? I was surrounded on all 4 sides by 4 lane arterial roads and office towers. The retail that existed catered primarily to office workers on lunch and not whatever residents lived within College Park. About once a year somebody would be murdered on the Yonge street strip (horrible, but true) about 200 meters from my house (and also 150 meters below my house). Despite these occurrences, I never thought the area I lived in was unsafe and the murders never affected me. This would be quite different had I lived in a real residential neighbourhood. In fact, I know so because I used to live off Symington Ave. and when somebody was murdered in cold blood there, the whole community was on edge for weeks. I think this would even be true in a very dense residential environment like St. Lawrence.

I think that the area around the proposed casino is much more like the area around RoCP than any traditionally residential neighbourhood, or even the area of Cityplace west of Spadina. Sure, people live nearby. Thousands of people. But they are generally detached from their community. I think if you forced a poll (because people in these communities would probably be genuinely disinterested) about the casino, most people would not give a hoot. When I lived in RoCP I couldn't have cared less what kind of building or use was moving in next door.

That's the difference between a residential neighbourhood and a downtown area. When you live downtown you trade any semblance of local culture and identity for a public, metropolitan one. You acknowledge that this space is everyone's and no one's at the same time. You are free to go there, and the infrastructure will accommodate you, but the infrastructure will not accommodate your personal whims. That's why I can't agree that downtown - which is the central meeting place for all Torontonians - can be dictated by local residents alone. You live downtown because of that trade-off I made. If you want to walk around barefoot in the public bathroom, so to speak, maybe downtown isn't for you.

 

[Automation Gallery]

There are hundreds of kids already living in these tiny condos, however, and many more will come once the new school is finally built in Cityplace!

Gee please, i have told you before.... that the school that has been planned for over 10 years down there, is still 5-7 years from becoming reality.....by that time those little kids your talking about, will be going to high school in some other neighbourhood

 

[TOperson]

So, how does everyone think the Council vote will go? Do you think the OLG will accept any of the City's conditions, for real? I feel like it could go either way. The suspense is killing me.

 

[Automation Gallery]

So, how does everyone think the Council vote will go? Do you think the OLG will accept any of the City's conditions, for real? I feel like it could go either way. The suspense is killing me.

Well if true, (100 million)... this vote might just be a squeaker
'Money will be the game changer'

OLG proposes $100M for Toronto to host casino
The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation has come up with a revised funding formula for any casino in downtown Toronto — and sources tell CBC News that figure will be $100 million annually, or more.

The money would be paid to the city from the casino coffers.

But sources also say the premier and the finance minister have not given final approval to the proposal.

"The government is still considering a formula that in order to be fair will be the same across the province, with no special deals for any one municipality," an official in the premier's office said.

Officially the OLG will only say that it "has completed its province-wide review of the Municipal Contribution Agreement " and the decision is now in the hands of the government.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2013/05/03/toronto-casino-funding.html

 

[nfitz]

Well if true, (100 million)... this vote might just be a squeaker

A paltry $100 million for a city with a population 2.6 million is a game changer?

 

[Torontovibe]

Have the full social and health related costs of this casino, ever been fully examined? I wonder if they would be over or under that 100 million? Wouldn't it make sense to know what we're getting ourselves into?

 

[spider]

As the onion peels it appears that more than one US based gambling outfit really really wants to establish a branch in the City of Toronto. the route to that realization unfortunately lies through the OLG which also really really wants it to happen except they want the lion's share of the booty to be exacted from said gambling operator rather than the City.

Interesting that the current and growing public opinion towards saying no thanks to both the other parties has resulted in a much more lucrative deal for the City is being whispered about. Just how interested are they in making this thing happen?

It may be time for the City to suggest that the OLG become a third party in this arrangement and we will dictate the terms to both them and the US gambling outfit. Said terms will include annual payments and location within the City. I have already stated that I would tell them that they can build their Super Bingo Parlour in a part of town for which we have no other use. If the City is dictating the terms we will be insulated from subsequent Provincial governments "adjusting" the terms to suit their differing agendas.

If the Gambling guys and the OLG don't like those terms that is OK with me and I suspect the majority of my fellow Toronto citizens. We hold the hammer here.

As far as the 10,000 jobs (or whatever the number of the day may be) is concerned those job winners will live all over the GTA no matter where the Casino may eventually be built.

 

[GenerationW]

Have the full social and health related costs of this casino, ever been fully examined? I wonder if they would be over or under that 100 million? Wouldn't it make sense to know what we're getting ourselves into?

How about a similar study before the next liquor or beer store opens?

 

[TOperson]

Have the full social and health related costs of this casino, ever been fully examined? I wonder if they would be over or under that 100 million? Wouldn't it make sense to know what we're getting ourselves into?

Off the top of my head... say the number of problem gamblers/addicts comes out at 1% of the population (I think the real figure is 1-3%, so 1% is conservative), so that's 25 000 people. The social & health costs per problem gambler only need to be $4000 each to reach the $100M mark. Given that the social & health costs include poverty/bankruptcy, divorce, job loss, criminal activity, generalized family discord and the knock-on effects if there are children involved, I don't think $4000 is a stretch.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Again last call should be 4am if we take this albatross. And there should be more then one, like 4 casinos.

 

[BurlOak]

Off the top of my head... say the number of problem gamblers/addicts comes out at 1% of the population (I think the real figure is 1-3%, so 1% is conservative), so that's 25 000 people. The social & health costs per problem gambler only need to be $4000 each to reach the $100M mark. Given that the social & health costs include poverty/bankruptcy, divorce, job loss, criminal activity, generalized family discord and the knock-on effects if there are children involved, I don't think $4000 is a stretch.

Considering that there are Casino's within roghly 1 hour of Toronto to the East, North and West (south?), and also slots within Toronto, we can assume that 80% of those problem gamblers have already been accounted for. This means the Casino would create 10,000 permanent jobs and maybe a similar number of construction jobs for 5,000 problem gamblers. I think the children of those getting jobs would definatly be grateful.

I do agree it would be nice to quantify the problem. This also means calculating the total provincial money received from the Casino - since this would all go towards transit in the GTA.

 

[TOperson]

Considering that there are Casino's within roghly 1 hour of Toronto to the East, North and West (south?), and also slots within Toronto, we can assume that 80% of those problem gamblers have already been accounted for. This means the Casino would create 10,000 permanent jobs and maybe a similar number of construction jobs for 5,000 problem gamblers. I think the children of those getting jobs would definatly be grateful.

I do agree it would be nice to quantify the problem. This also means calculating the total provincial money received from the Casino - since this would all go towards transit in the GTA.

I think the 25K problem gamblers would be NEW problem gamblers. That's the whole point of a Toronto/GTA casino - to attract new gamblers, lots of them, over the decades-long lifespan of the facility, not just to re-distribute the existing gamblers. There is no net gain for the province in redistributing gamblers.

Myself, I'm not willing to throw 25K people and their families etc to the wolves just to partially and minimally fund transit.

If this city's only option for creating jobs is a casino, we are really in a pickle. Particularly since casinos don't usually pay off that way.

 

[canmark]

Waterloo says no to casino: http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/waterloo-councillors-vote-unanimously-against-pursuing-casino-1.1269812

A casino may still show up in Waterloo Region, but it won’t be in the City of Waterloo.

Councillors in that city voted unanimously Monday against pursuing a casino.

The vote came shortly after councillors learned the results of a public survey in which 82 per cent of respondents were against the idea of a casino in Waterloo.

 

[TOareaFan]

I think the 25K problem gamblers would be NEW problem gamblers. That's the whole point of a Toronto/GTA casino - to attract new gamblers, lots of them, over the decades-long lifespan of the facility, not just to re-distribute the existing gamblers. There is no net gain for the province in redistributing gamblers.

Myself, I'm not willing to throw 25K people and their families etc to the wolves just to partially and minimally fund transit.

If this city's only option for creating jobs is a casino, we are really in a pickle. Particularly since casinos don't usually pay off that way.

Totally indifferent to casinos here....but I find a bit of a flaw in your point here. If I were someone with a gambling addiction problem and I lived in Toronto, that problem would already be being served by the plethora of gambling outlets within a very easy commute of where I am. Woodbine/Niagara/Rama/etc.....on the other hand, the majority of the population who are, likely, as indifferent towards gambling as I am are not going out to gamble.

So I do think a casino in Toronto, or surrounds, can create a greater number of new OLG customers than the number of problem gamblers it creates (the number of new problem gamblers will not be zero as there will, sadly and inevitably, be new ones identified....but I think it is less than the general population's ratio of problem gamblers because a fairly significant percentage of Toronto's problem gambling community would already have been identified/created.....that would be my hypothesis anyway).

 

[TOperson]

Totally indifferent to casinos here....but I find a bit of a flaw in your point here. If I were someone with a gambling addiction problem and I lived in Toronto, that problem would already be being served by the plethora of gambling outlets within a very easy commute of where I am. Woodbine/Niagara/Rama/etc.....on the other hand, the majority of the population who are, likely, as indifferent towards gambling as I am are not going out to gamble.

So I do think a casino in Toronto, or surrounds, can create a greater number of new OLG customers than the number of problem gamblers it creates (the number of new problem gamblers will not be zero as there will, sadly and inevitably, be new ones identified....but I think it is less than the general population's ratio of problem gamblers because a fairly significant percentage of Toronto's problem gambling community would already have been identified/created.....that would be my hypothesis anyway).

If the existing casinos were already meeting all the potential demand for gambling in the GTA, there would be no casino proposal now. The point of the new casino is expansion - that's the word the OLG actually uses. So yes, it is about attracting new gamblers, and some of them will turn out to be problem gamblers.