- 'An End to the Southern Strategy, But No Post-Racial America' says David Love
- "A Question of Place": An essay on the power of community
- Just Equally Speaking….
- Eagles owe Philadelphia the 8 million it needs to keep libraries open
- who would like to see Verizon offer cable TV in Phila?
- Council Committee Passed the Freeze
- Carol Campbell Passes Away
- My first trip to the public library
- Fight digital exclusion
- What if half of Philadelphia didn't have roads?
In the Navy: casinos and the art of negotiation
Anti-casino organizers have done a wonderful job in Philadelphia.
A patchwork quilt of civic and community groups has been woven together into a full fledged anti-casino movement. Although this activism started later than anti-gaming activity in other parts of the state (where religious leaders led the fight against Democratic House leaders and the Governor to introduce legislation to allow gaming at PA racetracks), the energy that talented organizers have cultivated from every day citizens has been invigorating—especially in a city where grassroots organizing is so often moribund.
Folks who have worked so hard to oppose casinos have created some leverage for the city to use in further negotiations with the state regarding casinos. I know many anti-casino folks want to stop the introduction of casinos at all, but I am of the opinion that casinos are inevitable and that if properly sited, they need not harm any neighborhoods.
Which brings me to the Navy Yard.
The Navy Yard, located along the southern most portion of Broad Street is almost a full two-miles from any one house. It is a bizarre enclave, with an eclectic mix of brick mansions, mid-century military architecture, warehouses, and towering, ghostly ships.
The Navy Yard has seen a renaissance fo kinds with the relocation of the Urban Outfitters Company to the Yard (which occupies four buildings including a renovated warehouse with a canteen operated by the old Frog Commissary guys, a gym, a model sweatshop, Koi pond, and coffee bar—in short a California, dot-com, style workplace sure to be featured in ReadyMade, Dwell or some other hipster design magazine). TastyKake is also relocating to the Navy Yard and combined with ship building, some remaining Navy personnel, and more, it’s a commercially viable place.
That said, there are still lots of old brick warehouses, located right on the waterfront and around piers of varying lengths. In fact, without too much work, it’s not hard to imagine the Navy Yard as a Philly-version of Baltimore’s Inner Harbor or San Fransisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf.
Those comparisons might make the urban aesthetes among you sneer, but the fact is that as commercial and touristy as both those places may be, they are the kinds of places where a casino might fit in well. And frankly, I could see myself making a trip to a Navy Yard Casino once or twice a summer for an evening of waterside drinking, bad karaoke, and nickel-dropping into a slot machine.
Beyond the fact that the Navy Yard would be a good fit for casinos, casinos have a lot to offer the Navy Yard.
Just two weeks ago, it was reported that a plan has been approved to spend money to study the possibility of extending the Broad Street Subway south to the Navy Yard. Such an expansion will easily cost $1 or 2 billion. There’s also been talk of tunneling under the Delaware to New Jersey-which would add at least another $4 billion to the price of subway expansion. Extensions of the sub to both the Navy Yard, and especially the Garden State, would greatly expand regional economic development and greatly reduce highway congestion.
However, these expansions will cost a lot of money which, study or no study, it's hard to imagine SEPTA or the city or the state paying for anytime soon. That's where casinos come in.
I am not an anti-casino activist, no do I think I will find the time to become one anytime soon. However, if I was planning a campaign, I would seriously consider using the leverage built so far to convince the current or future Mayor or Council to get behind a casino compromise plan to be presented to the state Gaming Board.
Such a plan would involve a major compromise on all sides but would basically allow full-scale gaming—slot and table games—in exchange for only one license being granted to a site at the Navy Yard (which would I think require an exemption to state law since its pretty close to the Chester site) and a promise that the casino operator dedicate a portion of their profit, on top of whatever other taxes they pay, to the payment of a bond for subway expansion to New Jersey.
We live in a big city with a lot of needs. I don’t like the fact that so much power is concentrated in the hands of corporations and profit-driven engines, but when it comes to casinos, I don’t know that I think we’re going to get away without having some. If that’s the case, it’s not too late to site them as far away from neighborhoods as possible, it’s not too late to make sure that they hire Philadelphians and pay them well, it’s not too late to actually be able to have fun at the newly built casinos, and last, but not least, it’s not too late to get casino profits to fund the public good.
That’s why I say, put the casino at the Navy Yard.
PS- I have suffered a hard drive crash which, along with a desire to have fun, has taken me offline as of late. However, whatever your opinion on casinos, remember that more than anything, the above post is a tribute to the old-school style of YPP postings--half-baked policy ideas designed to stir the imagination.











Good Thinking
But from what I understand, the military has still retained a few buildings in the Navy Yard for testing and R&D. I doubt the DoD would be thrilled with the idea of a casino 50 feet from some high-security testing location. And let's face it; a legal battle between Philadelphia and the DoD over zoning and development would end very quickly.
But you are onto something. If the casino's must exist, better to have them be contained and isolated from residential neighborhoods. Because the Navy Yard is pretty much new land for the city, it'd be easier to build a casino there rather than have to worry about destroying another existing community with its own history. I think if the casino could be contained and isolated, with separate entrances/exits, parking, and fencing, it's definitely a better option than most.
Nice
Some of the folks in the community-based movement have eyed the Navy Yard as a potential sight for about 5 months now. We too think it would be a great idea and one that deserves serious consideration. There are, however, two issues that stand in the way. One is community based. The other is a problem with the law.
First, Community groups on the lower end of Broad Street are resistant to the idea--regardless of it being 1.5-2 miles from their homes. Their feeling is that their communities are already overburdened by having 2 stadiums and 2 sports arenas, which causes a considerable about of traffic and other QOL concerns. These are legitimate concerns. In addition, many of these communities experience massive amounts of basement flooding that they believe is the result of large developments in the South. Until some of these issues are worked out, it is hard for us to get them to buy into this plan. I'm not saying it is impossible. But that, at least my organization has to be careful in what we advocate for. Right now, while in this instance the buffer is easily met, the last thing we want to do is to hoist this upon unwilling takers.
Second, the Navy Yard is likely within 10 miles. of the Chester Harrah's Racino. Act 71 forbids licensed facilities from being within 10 miles of each other. There is a bill that would seek to change this, but it is our understanding that legislators who are happy with the money these "racinos" are bringing in will not like competition so close. This is the more significant hurdle.
Another issue is the port expansion argument. The ILA have been strong allies of ours. Though, I'd have to check on this.
But, I, like Ray think the Navy Yard could be an entertainment mecca for Philadelphia and, perhaps, casinos would help.
Disney
Disney Hole.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Navy Yard
A small correction: The western half of the Navy Yard is indeed within the 10 mile racino buffer zone (WHY DO RACINOS GET BUFFER ZONES WHEN NEIGHBORHOODS DON'T?), but the Eastern half is outside of it.
There are several available sites within Philadelphia that conform to a 1,500 buffer around casinos, and there would be more if the outsized 10-mile racino buffer was reduced.
That said, this always should have been the city's choice and not the casino's. Though City Council isn't in a position to stop construction of casinos, they do have the power to move them: they should convene a re-siting committee and choose those sites that are the "least worst" for Philadelphia.
I still maintain that no matter where casinos are placed, they will be a drain and a drag on our economy - siphoning off local entertainment dollars and killing local businesses.
They are a stealth tax where tax collector casinos net half the take.
They are horrendous public policy and should not be supported.
I would love to see a City
I would love to see a City free of casinos. But I'm just not entirely convinced we can do that at this juncture.
Racinos get buffers for two reasons--
(1) Money;
(2) I personally think the buffer ensured the sight would be in Central Philadelphia (note, not Center City) and near the water.
where exactly?
Anne wrote: "There are several available sites within Philadelphia that conform to a 1,500 buffer around casinos."
Anne, can you share exactly where those sites are? CasinoFree Philadelphia has been pushing this legislation in Council and Harrisburg - I think its only fair for CFP to share with Philadelphians as to whether they might be trying to move the casinos next door to someone else....
I want to point out, and I
I want to point out, and I cannot speak for CFP, that the DRNA wants these casinos re-sighted and believes the buffer is a reasonable limitation. That being said, the DRNA will support the buffer no matter where these thing are placed. This is no tool of convinenence for us. It should be applied anywhere a casino is threatened. No community should have to fear its destruction in favor of private interests.
ok but...
I am still hopeful to hear - where in Philadelphia are all the "several available" sites that Anne mentioned that casinos would be allowed in with the buffer, exactly?
This is a great thought
I just want to compliment Ray's post. Seems like we might be a little bit down the road on this one, but who knows. This is a great idea and makes a lot of sense. When 30s style Chicago mob gunfights break out, none of the bullets will fly through a group of row houses from all the way down in the Navy Yard.
---
BradyDale OnLine
The R.I.I.C. Blog
The Philadelphia Unemployment Project
To repeat myself
I think I made this point pretty clearly above, but I do want to repeat the point that no matter where the casinos are located, elicting sizeable community benefit agreements are important. Jeff Hornstein has talked about emulating a Pittsburgh housing justice movement that is predicated upon strategic negotiation of community benefits and that should be our goal here as well. Whether it is capital projects (like tranist expansion) or housing trust fund monies or dedicated funding to healthcare, anti-casino organizers need to make sure that the dissent they have created has a tangible output in the form of cold, hard cash for our city.
Easier said than done. How
Easier said than done. How would they be convinced to pay? What is in it for them?
The other argument is, they are paying sizable outlays in the form of taxes. If you want more money from them, why not try to get the City to slap on an additional "gambling profits tax" on all businesses that are members of the PGB in its borders? At least then it would not be a one shot deal.
Also, if a sizable community benefit agreement is gained, who dictates where the money goes? What communities have rights to the pie?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
answer for yourself
as much as I love the Socratic method Adam, I present some answers to the questions you raise above. However, it's not my call alone. You and any one else in the city can help answer these questions.
Ray has a point. They will
Ray has a point. They will pay. They want to sit down and talk. It's good business. Before I say this, at this time, I am not inclined to favor a CBA for each casino. That being said, here go my parameters:
But, first the communities AROUND these sites have to decide to sit down. That is their choice. Right now, there is not real desire to do that. There is optimism in some of the things we are fighting for.
Then, THEY have to decide what their objectives are if they do sit down. Shoud the CBAs guarantee money for a city wide projects. Or should the monies be used to mitigate issues in these communities resulting from having casinos. Personally, I'd like to see the money first go to these communities. They are taking the brunt for alleged wage tax benefits, additional school money and a convention center expansion. I'd like to see it fix up parks and playgrounds in Fishtown and Pennsport, plant trees in Whitman, make traffic improvments on Delware Ave., open or fund community centers in these communities for families, etc.
Most importantly, Act 71 must be changed to speak to, condition or allow for revocation of a license for failure to meet the terms of a CBA. Until that time, we're not fully protected and never will be.
Why ruin the Navy Yard too?
I agree that the Navy Yard is among "least bad" sites for a casino (and, at worst, the city should only get one). I also suspect that devising alternate locations like this is helpful in avoiding the Sugarhouse and Foxhouse debacles on our waterfront. Yet, I can not support the idea. Here's why:
It is true that the Navy Yard is a singular mix of architecture, purposes, and location. However, the relocation of Urban Outfitters and Tastykake to this site, to me, seems a harbinger of what's to come. I don't see how any meaningful, positive development at the Navy Yard could co-exist with a casino.
The Broad Street Line expansion is something long overdue, I think. (In fact, I think need hundreds of billions of dollars in investment in SEPTA, but that is another issue.) The Navy Yard could become a model of mixed-use development and rehab. It seems to be on its way already. Would not the tax revenue generated by luring companies such as TastyKake and Urban Outfitters exceed, once we factor in all external costs, that generated by a casino?
Excellent points. Today in
Excellent points. Today in Liberty Place, I saw a plan for the Navy Yard as a mixed-use community. That is positive planning--and one Philadelphia should embrace.
We should all note that casinos are not good development. Period. We are in a compromising position because the Guv and the Mayor want these things so badly.
Navy Yard does not want a slots parlor
The Navy Yard was an eligible location. However, the Navy Yard (PIDC) studied what would be the impact of a slots parlor early on and decided to say "no." PIDC has control of the land and simply would not lease or sell to a casino based on how their development plan would work with what they knew about slots parlors.
Ultimately, the slots were located where developers could buy/lease land. This was one problem with how the City responded to slots coming in. There was no planning in advance regarding what would be good siting decisions. Instead, the City looked at where developers were looking at land and then evaluated those decisions. That task force (chaired by Sean Fordham) published a preliminary and a final report that is still on line: www.phila.gov/gamingadvisory. It shows what sections of the City were eligible based on the state law.