Marketplace
![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.semissourian.com/images/nameplate.gif)
|
|
Partly Cloudy ~ River stage: 34.01 Rising Saturday, November 21, 2009 |
RSS
 Print
 Email link
 Respond to editor
 Read comments (8)
 Share link
Prop A under fire by Cape man, othersThursday, October 16, 2008A Cole County judge heard arguments Wednesday in Cape Girardeau businessman David Knight's attempt to block a measure to limit the number of casinos in Missouri but made no ruling. Knight, owner of Old Hickory Pits, has joined forces with state Rep. Ray Salva, D-Independence, and the anti-casino group Casino Watch to challenge Proposition A, a measure underwritten by casino owners that is estimated to raise up to $130 million annually for public schools. Circuit Judge Richard Callahan presided over the hearing and ordered the attorneys to file additional paperwork by Monday. He did not say when he would rule, representatives of both sides in the dispute said, but some added that they expected a decision sometime next week. Knight is challenging the measure on a number of points, and Callahan heard extensive arguments on whether it mixes too many subjects for a single ballot proposal. After the hearing, Knight said he intends to pursue an appeal if Callahan rules against the lawsuit. "We feel very strongly we are right and we will prevail," he said. Scott Charton, a spokesman for the Yes on A Coalition, said his side remains confident the measure will remain on the Nov. 4 ballot. "We made a very strong case that Proposition A should be put before voters," he said. "The facts are that the secretary of state did a good job summarizing the proposal and we are very confident in its wording. It will meet the legal challenge." Along with higher casino taxes and a limit on casinos, the measure would eliminate the $500 loss limit, require new revenue be dedicated to public schools and require an annual audit of the funds to make sure the legislature does not substitute new gambling revenue for other school funding sources. Attorney C. Robert Buckley, representing some of the measure's opponents, argued Wednesday the ballot item is an attempt to "logroll" voters by getting them to approve the casino provisions because they like some parts, even though they likely oppose others. Secretary of State Robin Carnahan and State Auditor Susan Montee are the defendants in the lawsuit; the Yes on A coalition has joined the case as an intervenor on the side of Carnahan and Montee. Salva and Knight have also joined forces to form a campaign committee to oppose the measure. They have raised little money, but Ameristar Casinos and Pinnacle Entertainment have joined forces to spend $11.5 million to get the measure on the ballot and pay for the campaign effort. The campaign against the measure will be a shoestring effort, Salva said. "I don't have that kind of money. The people fighting this don't have that kind of money." Knight has joined with partner Jim Riley in Cape Girardeau to purchase land for a possible casino. Salva represents Sugar Creek, Mo., which also wants a new casino. If the measure passes, those plans would be put on hold indefinitely, with the only way to secure a license being if another casino in Missouri ceased operating or sought to move operations. 388-3642 On the Web: Proposition A supporters: www.yesonpropa.com Proposition A opponents: www.notocasinosonpropa.com; http://casinowatch.org/ Comments  Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on semissourian.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
|
Enter your email address to subscribe to our mailing lists:
|
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Furl
Reddit
Google
"a measure underwritten by casino owners that is estimated to raise up to $130 million annually for public schools."
At what social cost to our community? How many MORE will be on reduced/free lunch program if a Cape Girardeau casino is successfully? How many revenues will be gambled that are currently spent at local small businesses?
I believe a "community" would need to loss $100,000 of disposable income to gain a local benefit of $5,000. Too high of price???
If they put a casino just across the river the
place would be packed and most of the people
there would have Missouri plates on their cars. And you could guarantee that on any given day or night there would be 100 to ????? and they'd be from good
Ole Cape Girardeau. It will be real nice not to have
to drive so far and at least Cape will be getting
my money instead of Illinois
Thats a great idea. Put it across the river in IL. =)
We should maintain the $500 loss limit. That is above all others. We can bring the casino limit up at a later time. I'm opposed to any more casinos in MO, but above all, I'm opposed to dropping the $500 loss limit.
If you want to see an example of the "cost" to a community, take a run up to St Charles where the Ameristar casino is located. Downtown Cape can only dream about thriving like downtown St Charles.
SPEAKING AS SOMEONE WHO BOTH OWNS A SMALL BUSINESS AND IS MARRIED TO A PINNACLE EMPLOYEE I STRONGLY ENDORSE PROP A. I OWN PERRYVILLE PRODUCE MARKET IN PERRYVILLE, MO. AND MY WIFE, MISSY IS A DEALER AT LUMINERE PLACE IN ST. LOUIS. PERSONALLY I THINK THAT MR. BUCKLEY MAKES A VERY WEAK ARGUMENT, TO SAY THAT MISSOURI RESIDENTS ARE BEING TRICKED IN TO VOTING YES BECAUSE THEY LIKE SOME PARTS BUT ARE LIKELY OPPOSED TO OTHERS. IM SURE MOST PEOPLE LIKE RECEIVING A PAYCHECK BUT DON'T NECESSARLY LIKE GOING TO WORK. I WONDER IF MR. BUCKLEY WOULD COULD ACCOMIDATE THAT LAW SUIT? POINT IS PROP A IS CLEARLY SPELLED OUT AND RESIDENTS SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO WEIGH TO PROS VS. CONS AND MAKE A DECESION BASED ON THAT. THE FACT THAT THIS LAW SUIT WANTS TO TAKE THAT AWAY FROM MISSOURI VOTES IS JUST INSULTING. IVE KEPT A VERY OPEN MIND AND HAVE READ ALL THE COMPLAINTS FROM THOSE OPPOSED TO PROP A AND SO FAR I HAVENT COME ACROSS A SINGLE ON THAT IS JUSTIFIED. AS FAR AS MR. KNIGHT AND MR. RILEY GO, WHAT THEY FAILED TO MENTION IS THAT PRIOR TO PROP A EVEN BEING PUT ON THE TABLE THE MISSOURI GAMING COMMISSION HAD ALLREADY STOPPED ISSUING CASINO PERMITS. PRIOR TO LUMINERE PLACE IN ST. LOUIS EVEN BEING BUILT THERE WAS A BIDDING WAR BETWEEN PINNACLE AND HARRAHS ENTERTAINMENT AS TO WHO WAS GOING TO GET TO OPEN A NEW PROPERTY. HARRAHS WANTED TO BUILD A RIO BRAND OF CASINO ON THE RIVERFRONT BUT HAD NO INTEREST IN OPENING A SECOND LOCATION AT THE TIME. THE MISSOURI GAMING COMMISSION DECIDED TO AWARD THE BID TO PINNACLE WHO HAD PLANS TO BUILD TWO PROPERTIES. PINNACLE CONSIQUENTLY ALSO PURCHASED THE ALLREADY OPERATIONAL PRESIDENT CASINO. AS FAR AS PEOPLE CONCERNED WITH ENDING OF THE LOSS LIMIT DUE TO MONEY BEING GAMBLED AWAY INSTEAD OF SPEND WITH LOCAL SMALL BUSINESS; ARE YOU SERIOUS??? EVEN IF THE LOSS LIMIT REMAINS IN PLACE DOWNTOWN GAMBLERS ARE A 2 MINUTE CAR RIDE AWAY FROM THE CASINO QUEEN, RIGHT ACROSS THE RIVER WHERE THERE IS NO LOSS LIMIT. THEN THERE ARE THE PEOPLE CONCERNED THAT WITH THE LOSS LIMIT ALSO GOES THE REQUIRMENT TO OBTAIN A BOARDING PASS. I HAVE READ COMMENTS THAT THIS WILL ALLOW UNDERAGE PEOPLE ENTRY TO THE GAMING FLOOR AS WELL AS CONCERN THAT THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED THEMSELVES OFF THE CASINOS WILL ONCE AGAIN BE ALLOWED TO COME ON IN. FIRST OFF IT IS TRUE THAT YOU MUST PRESENT AN ID TO GET A BOARDING PASS BUT THAT IS NOT THE ONLY ID CHECK PERFORMED. RATHER YOU HAVE A CASINO CARD OR NOT, IF YOU APPEAR UNDERAGE SECURITY WILL STILL ASK FOR A VALID STATE PHOTO ID BEFORE ALLOWING ENTRY. SIMPLY HAVING A BOARDING PASS WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO WALTZ RIGHT IN. IF THAT WERE THE CASE UNDERAGE CHILDREN WOULD NEED ONLY PICK UP THEIR PARENTS CARDS AND GO HAVE A GOOD TIME. AS FAR AS THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED THEMSELVES OFF GOES..... THAT PROGRAM IS CALLED THE MISSOURI DISSASSOCIATED PERSONS OR FOR THOSE IN THE CASINO INDUSRTY THE " DAP " LIST. DAP PLAYERS ARE WELL KNOW BY CASINO MANAGEMENT, DEALERS, AND THE STATE GAMING AGENTS ASSIGNED TO CASINO PROPERTIES. THEY ARE ALSO MADE AWARE THE SEVERE CONSIQUENCES OF BOARDING A PROPERTY IF THEY ARE ON THE DAP LIST. PERSONS ON THE DAP LIST CAUGHT ON CASINO PROPERTY ARE ACTUALLY BREAKING THE LAW AND ARE ARRESTED AND CHARGED FOR TRESPASSING. HOWEVER FOR THOSE WHO REALLY WANT TO GO GAMBLING JUST LIKE MINORS ALL THEY WOULD NEED IS SOMEONE ELSES CARD TO GAIN ENTRY SO NOTHING IN PROP A REALLY AFFECTS ANY OF THE ISSUES ITS OPPONETS HAVE BROUGHT UP. WHAT IS DOES MEAN PLAIN AND SIMPLE IF PASSED IS MORE REVENUE FOR OUR SCHOOLS AND INCREACED JON SECURITY FOR THE THOUSANDS OF MISSOURI RESIDENTS CASINOS EMPLOY.
PLEASE EXCUSE THE MANY TYPOS IN MY PREVIOUS STORY. I WAS POSTING MY COMMENT FROM MY BLACKBERRY AND THE KEYS ARE VERY SMALL AND DIFFICULT
As a former long time casino employee who has been through many of these propositions in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Missouri, rest assured, you are being scammed. It's the same bait and switch they use every time. They tell you it means millions more for schools, then they decrease funding from other sources.
There is NO net gain from casinos. The jobs they create are lost when business owners gamble away their businesses. The taxes they pay would have been earned from other local businesses; the dollars are just redirected to casinos causing even more local businesses to close.
They don’t earn their profits from high betting tourists. They “grind” the “fleas” for their profit. That means they earn the bulk of their profit from small local players. The smaller the bet and the longer you play, the more they make. They may benefit from tourists but they don’t attract them. There are casinos all over America. They aren’t “destinations” anymore.
I watched a 36 year old close two family restaurants after 50+ years in the family, fire over 40 employees, and commit suicide. I told the managers he was threatening suicide but they didn’t care or even speak with him. I watched a casino dealer inherit enough money to retire on, quit her job, and get caught a year later giving favors in the parking lot for $10 so she could gamble just a little more. These aren’t the exceptions; they are the rule for local addicts. Most of these addicts didn’t even gamble before casinos opened.
I’m ashamed of my time working in casinos. Teachers, school boards, and government officials who are supporting this will now share in my shame. When you look at the children you are claiming to help, remember that many of them will go hungry because their father gambled away his paycheck. Many will go homeless because their mother gambled away their mortgage payments. Many will be future addicts who will destroy themselves financially and gamble away their dreams. Some will even commit suicide in despair.