A Giant Step Forward
Joel Rose, 1/12/2007

The Anti-casino movement took a major step forward earlier today with a favorable ruling in Federal Court in Buffalo.

Federal Court Ruling May Slow Down Buffalo Casino

James Fink, Business First, Buffalo, NY

January 13, 2007

Parents Urged to Consider Dangers of Gambling Gifts for Kids

Jeff Marotta, 11/22/2006

Poker sets for kids? Think twice before anteing up

Has Santa's workshop moved to Las Vegas?

Get ready for what has become an annual marketing onslaught of gambling-related toys, books and paraphernalia as we approach the holiday shopping season. My current favorite example is the Pink Poker Night "It's A Chick Thing" Kit, where for $29.95 you can have "everything a chick needs to host a fabulous girls' night in."

So what's the fuss? I received this e-mail from a concerned mother of two:

"I want to know how much I should be worrying about gambling and the health of my kids. They watch poker tournaments on TV, their friends wear clothing with references to poker, and I heard my son talk about playing poker with friends.... What is a mother to do?"

She is not alone in wondering about the effects of ongoing exposure to gambling. Today's is the first generation to grow up in a society where gambling is widely accepted, advertising is ubiquitous and gambling activities are commonplace.

Research indicates that 60-90 percent of youth engage in gambling, and that youth problem gambling rates are 2-4 times higher than those of adults. Surveys of Oregon teens tell us drugs, alcohol and gambling often travel together, yet many parents see gambling as a relatively safe pastime and encourage it as an alternative activity.

I told the concerned mom that, although we don't know the ultimate effects of today's gambling popularity, we do know both children and adults can and do get caught up in gambling in a way that is harmful to themselves and others around them.

This is not to say that if your child is gambling you need to panic -- most kids engage in some form of gambling and most don't develop gambling problems. But you do need to recognize that gambling carries risk and approach it accordingly, as you would tobacco use, drug use or fastening your car's seatbelt.

What do you look for if you're concerned your child might have a problem? Watch for signs such as lying about gambling, gambling superseding other activities, using money to gamble that's supposed to be used for other things, borrowing money to gamble, or stealing and letting schoolwork suffer.

Another suggestion I gave the concerned mom was to talk to her kids about gambling using these simple guidelines:

· Notice opportunities to discuss gambling. Help children make sense out of what they see on television, in the news and in the community.

· Discuss rules and expectations for behavior, and follow through with consequences.

· Be specific. When you talk about gambling, mention examples such as buying a lottery ticket, betting on a sports event, playing bingo.

· Be clear about your own values but avoid sweeping statements (all gambling is bad) or threats ("if I ever catch you betting money..."). Kids feel immortal, so scaring them doesn't work; threats invite rebellion.

· Emphasize balance and choice. Facing choices about gambling and other risky behaviors can be a good way to practice making good decisions about many life issues.

As a parent, you play the most important role in preventing problem gambling behaviors in your children. You may want to think twice before buying your daughter a "Pink Poker Night" set or, for that matter, any one of the hundreds of gambling products that will adorn your newspaper's ad inserts.

A better gift is talking to your kids about the risks of gambling and helping them understand the best bets made in life aren't made in card games.

Golisano Primes Anti-Casino Push

Brian Meyer, Buffalo News, 10/7/2006

Billionaire businessman B. Thomas Golisano plans to spend more than a million dollars on an anti-casino marketing blitz, an announcement that kicked off a two-day forum against legalized gambling. Conference participants applauded when Golisano also announced that his hockey team - the Buffalo Sabres - will not sign any new contracts with the New York State Lottery for advertising during games in HSBC Arena.

The regional conference, which wraps up this afternoon at the Adam's Mark Hotel, was held the same week Mayor Byron W. Brown announced an agreement with the Seneca Nation of Indians on plans for a $125 million casino in the Cobblestone District.

Golisano accused pro-casino forces of creating a "monopoly of vice between government and gambling." The Rochester entrepreneur said he recently spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on newspaper ads detailing the economic downsides of casinos.

Participants previewed the next phase of the marketing campaign.

Radio commercials will hit local airwaves soon. They tell casino patrons "the odds are stacked against you" and that they're showered with free food and other casino perks because "they pegged you as a big loser." Even if lawsuits fail to block construction of the casino, Golisano said the ad campaign will continue with messages that casinos fuel crime and personal bankruptcies, and hurt other businesses.

"The train has got to stop. I think this is a great place to stop it," he told reporters at a news conference.

One woman later asked Golisano what people who don't have money to bankroll an ad campaign could do to help. He encouraged them to write letters to newspapers and to call elected officials, including Brown.

"Bug the hell out of them," he said.

Some prominent lawyers attending the conference, sponsored by the National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling, said they're hopeful that lawsuits pending in state and federal courts will block construction of Seneca Buffalo Creek Casino. Former city Comptroller Robert E. Whelan, who also served as a State Supreme Court judge, described the legal papers as "absolutely brilliant."

The casino pact announced Thursday still requires approval from the Senecas' Tribal Council and the Common Council.

On Friday, Brown clarified what he called some reporters' misinterpretation of comments he made a day earlier. Brown said Friday the agreement would provide the city with "legally binding" assurances involving goals for casino work force hiring, marketing commitments and other key elements that caused talks to break down this summer. He said he never meant to imply that terms in the agreement would be nonbinding.

When asked about Golisano's sharp criticism of the casino pact, Brown stood firm. "I respect his opinion and have spoken to him on this issue many times. But we feel strongly that we've taken steps to protect and safeguard the interests of people in the city of Buffalo," Brown said.

Joseph Finnerty, an attorney representing casino opponents, disputed Brown's claims.

"Now it's clear that our politicians in City Hall are not going to protect us, and they're not going to move forward with enlightened public policy," he said.

County Executive Joel A. Giambra said the county will aggressively move forward with a lawsuit aimed at blocking the casino. "We will not back off because of some politicians who think that we're in a state of desperation and that [the casino] is going to solve the problems," Giambra said.

Golisano also expressed a view that he said he doesn't often publicly share for fear of offending people. He doesn't think members of the Seneca Nation should receive checks from casino revenues, saying all nationalities have either been "overrun" by foreign interests or taken advantage of in other ways.

"My family came from Italy, and I don't know how many times Italy was overrun by foreign countries. You know what? I don't get a check. I don't understand why members of the Seneca Nation should be getting checks for casino earnings."

National experts have been taking part in the conference, armed with evidence indicating that casinos create $3 in added costs for every $1 of benefit derived by a community. Some city officials have argued that if a casino is going to be built, it would be better to have a large "destination" facility as opposed to a scaled-down casino like the one the Senecas once threatened to erect. Golisano disagreed.

"I would rather have the cracker box [casino], because I think the impact on the community is going to be far less," he said.

e-mail: bmeyer@buffnews.com

City Hall Ends Fulton St. Talks with Senecas

Mark Leitner, WNED Buffalo, 8/2/2006

BUFFALO 2006-08-02 Mayor Brown said his staff and Seneca negotiators have been going round and round for some six months on the one block stretch of Fulton Street that the Tribe wants to incorporate in the design of its proposed Buffalo Creek Casino.

The Senecas have said the dispute over Fulton Street could result in a less ambitious casino complex.

City Hall's blessing was contingent upon the Senecas agreeing to 24-negotiating points as part of a legally - binding document on the purchase of Fulton. The city wanted to make sure half the employees of the $125 million casino would be Buffalo residents. The city also wanted the Senecas to promise not to acquire additional land in Buffalo.

The Senecas rejected the conditions.

"I have today informed the Seneca Nation of Indians that the City of Buffalo has officially discontinued all negotiations regarding the abandonment and sale of Fulton Street," Brown said.

Seneca President Barry Snyder said late Wednesday that the tribe will build a "temporary" casino in Buffalo while it works to finalize plans for a permanent facility.

The temporary casino would be about 5,000 square feet and would contain about 100 slot machines.

© Copyright 2006, wned

Casinos and Crime: The Luck Runs Out

Richard Morin, Washington Post, 5/11/2006

When it comes to crime, legalized casino gambling seemed to be a surprisingly good bet: Local unemployment went down, tax revenue went up and crime didn't increase when a casino opened. Some researchers even found that crime declined immediately after casinos came to town.

Well, the casino cure for crime proved to be just as delusional as gamblers' luck, says University of Georgia economist David B. Mustard.

Mustard and Earl L. Grinols of Baylor University analyzed crime data collected from all 3,165 U.S. counties in the United States from 1977 to 1996 and looked at local crime rates before and after casinos opened.

They found that crime didn't budge when a casino began operating -- at least at first. Crime began to rise after the first year, slowly at first and then more quickly, until it had far surpassed what it would have been if the casino had never opened. By the fifth year of operation, robberies were up 136 percent; aggravated assaults, 91 percent; auto theft, 78 percent; burglary, 50 percent; larceny, 38 percent; and rape, 21 percent. Controlling for other factors, 8.6 percent of property crimes and 12.6 percent of violent crimes were attributed to casinos, he said.

But what about all those casino jobs and newly minted police? Mustard said the positive effects of casinos are fleeting -- payrolls and tax collections quickly plateau, and municipalities don't keep adding cops after the first wave of casino tax revenue rolls in.

What's more, Mustard said, crime rates didn't rise in neighboring counties while they soared in casino counties -- evidence that casinos create crime locally and don't merely attract it from somewhere else.

And here's sobering news for those in the District and Maryland who think casinos would jump-start the local economies: "Even using conservative estimates of costs and generous estimates of benefits, we still find the costs exceed the benefits," Mustard said.

MAYOR BROWN: A PUZZLEMENT

Dick Hirsch, Business First of Buffalo, 6/9/2006

I’m still trying to make up my mind about Mayor Byron Brown. People are wondering whether Brown will support or oppose the proposed Seneca Casino, but after five months in office, we don’t know. I have a few fuzzy ideas about him, nothing very conclusive.

The casino issue aside for a moment, I can report a couple of conclusions. First, he really looks good in a suit. He has great ties, too, probably selected by his wife, and he looks good in photo ops at City Hall or at civic events.

As far as suits go, the last mayors who really looked good in a suit were Chester Kowal, Frank Sedita and Steve Pankow. They often appeared as though they had just stepped out of the show window at Kleinhans, at Main and Court. Kleinhans has been gone for years and now it’s hard to buy a tie downtown, which may explain the downward drift of more recent mayors.

Stanley Makowski, who did his internship unloading freight cars, always looked uncomfortable in a suit and, as for Jimmy Griffin, a lot of adjectives have been used to describe him, but debonair was never among them. Anthony Masiello made a concerted effort at fashion, but basketball players pose a problem that requires the services of a talented tailor. Masiello clearly never located one.

The other quality of the Brown incumbency that has captured my attention is his speaking style. He reads a good speech and he seems poised, if not too informative, when ad-libbing. He also has a tendency to speak in complete sentences, a notable trait. His natural speaking patterns don’t have some of the familiar Buffalo neighborhood accents and rhythms, which is all to the good. I don’t intend to dwell on the elocution standards of our past mayors except to say that they all managed to get their points across. The last mayor to perfect a polished style was Sedita, although he sometimes insisted on using big words when smaller ones would have done fine.

We can’t forget about Grover Cleveland. No, I wasn’t covering City Hall during Cleveland’s brief term. He was elected in 1882 and served just a year before being elected governor. Cleveland couldn’t match Brown in the suit department because his weight hovered close to 300 pounds, and even with a vest it was difficult to conceal the paunch. The historians have noted that Cleveland was a compelling speaker.

So Brown scores very well on the podium, right there with Cleveland and Sedita. Or, as some of the guys at the Longbranch might observe, “he talks good.” But what is he saying? This is where it has become difficult for me to assess Brown any further than his sartorial splendor and his declamatory talents.

He is dancing around the biggest issue to confront Buffalo politicians in years, the threat, and I emphasize the term THREAT, of the construction of a casino near downtown. I know I’ve complained about the casino before, but this is a horse worth flogging. I have not seen any objective opinion saying it will provide an important benefit to the city. This is a poor city and the target audience of the promoters is our people, many of whom are needy and ever hopeful of the big hit. The casino will pillage households that are unable to resist the lure. Few tourists will be attracted to Buffalo by the chance to gamble.

Sure, there are local people who enjoy gambling and they seem more than satisfied with the opportunities in Niagara Falls, on both sides of the border. (Incidentally, for a primer on the economic impact of a casino, take a drive around the downtown area of Niagara Falls, New York. Stimulate local business? Phooey!)

The casino promoters released renderings of the design last week, and, in a city noted for its architectural heritage, this appears to be a monstrosity. That is an additional reason to marshal the forces and kill this project.

Mayor Brown is in a position to do that, but he must stop tiptoeing and dancing around the issue, he must take a dose of spine stiffener and get the backing of the Common Council.

How would Grover Cleveland have handled the issue? He was a populist, a man who measured public opinion and considered the impact of his actions. He paid little heed to special interests and is remembered today for a famous veto message he wrote as mayor, in which he declared “A public office is a public trust.”

Reprinted from Business First of Buffalo, June 9, 2006

HOYT CALLS ON GOVERNOR AND DOI TO RESCIND BUFFALO PORTION OF CASINO COMPACT

Press Release, 4/21/2006

Because of the consistent pattern of deceit and misleading information by the Seneca Nation along with documents recently filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that show a deliberate intent to mislead elected officials at all levels of government Assemblymember Sam Hoyt (D-Buffalo, Grand Island) announced today that he will soon introduce legislation to negate Buffalo as a potential casino site.

Assemblymember Sam Hoyt with Casino Opponents, 4/21/06

Hoyt has always been a vigorous opponent of a casino in downtown Buffalo and has voted against the proposal at every opportunity. The legislature passed a bill in 2001 which authorized the Seneca Nation/New York State compact, which Hoyt voted against. Hoyt’s legislation will revoke the legislature’s approval of the Buffalo related portions of the compact and direct the Governor to rescind his approval for same.

Hoyt has twice recently written to Department of the Interior Acting Secretary Lynn Scarlett – once asking her to investigate the Senecas’ shady land transactions used to purchase the proposed casino site and again asking her to rescind the DOI’s approval of the compact based on the information contained in the Senecas’ recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, Hoyt recently sent a letter to Governor Pataki asking him to rescind the Buffalo related portions of the compact on the grounds that the deal was reached based on a false set of expectations.

Hoyt said, “For anyone who ever doubted the impact this casino will have, the facts have now become crystal clear – this casino will primarily target Western New York residents, and will cannibalize existing jobs and discretionary income that would otherwise be supporting local businesses and entertainment venues.”

The Senecas’ SEC filings clearly describe the Senecas’ intent for the Buffalo casino is to “target the local Buffalo market and its suburbs.” This same report refers to Buffalo as an “underserved local market” and clearly expresses the Nation’s intent to exploit this “underserved” market of Buffalo and the surrounding areas. Their analysis of this population as “underserved” recognizes that despite the proliferation of casinos in nearby localities, there is potential to increase rather than simply redirect gambling. Joseph Finnerty, attorney and secretary of Citizens for a Better Buffalo said "The Seneca Buffalo Creek casino is not a development project. It is an anti-development project. It will suck jobs and money out of the city and it will do the most harm in Buffalo's poorest neighborhoods."

Hoyt concluded, “The intent of those who supported the casino was always to draw new dollars and new jobs to the region, not cannibalize existing ones as this casino will clearly and certainly do. Fortunately, there is time to rectify this great injustice now that the ominous truth is known and before ground is broken for the economically ruinous casino.”

Edit note: for a copy of each of the letters, please call 852-2795.

Sam Hoyt represents the 144th Assembly District.

Seneca Plan for Casino Aims Locally
SEC filing contrasts "world class" billing

Matthew Spina, Buffalo News, 4/9/2006

The Seneca Gaming Corp. confirms in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that its emerging Buffalo casino will cater primarily to Buffalo and its suburbs, raising worries that it will drain assets already here without pulling significant outside dollars into the local economy.

The disclosure kicked up these events Saturday:

After conferring with Mayor Byron W. Brown, City Hall's development commissioner called the news "very troubling" and said it "speaks strongly" against the city providing $6 million in water, sewer and road improvements the Senecas want for the casino.

County Executive Joel A. Giambra urged the County Legislature to join him in filing a "friend of the court" brief on behalf of the forces trying to block the casino in state and federal courts.

An Assembly Democrat said he would write to the U.S. Department of the Interior to say the public rhetoric from the Seneca Gaming Corp. had not jibed with their less-visible filings with government regulators.

A Seneca corporation spokesman responded that the Buffalo casino, to be built near the Cobblestone District, will significantly benefit Buffalo.

"We believe that Seneca Buffalo Creek Casino will provide tangible economic benefits to the community, most notably in the share of slot revenues," responded Seneca Gaming spokesman Phil Pantano. "It is a $125 million investment in an area that hasn't seen that kind of investment in some time, if ever."

Meanwhile, he said the casino could retake some of the $60 million to $80 million a year that leaves the Buffalo area to be wagered at the Fort Erie race track.

"We would certainly like to capture as much of that as possible and support local jobs," Pantano said.

The Seneca Buffalo Creek Casino's 1,900 to 2,200 slot machines, 30 to 50 gaming tables, plus its restaurants and stores are expected to "cater primarily to the local market," the corporation said in a February filing with the SEC, explaining that Buffalo Creek would "complement" Seneca Nation's casino to the north, Seneca Niagara, and its casino to the south, Seneca Allegany.

That disclosure, not the first of its kind from Seneca Gaming, provides fodder for Buffalo's anti-casino forces. While the corporation's SEC filings have been frank, its officials have publicly spoken in grander terms, saying they want to build a "signature destination" and a "world-class" facility in Buffalo.

"The public pronouncements in the press releases differ greatly from the written pronouncements in the official Securities and Exchange documents," Giambra said. "It appears that we might have a situation of fraud here."

He has said the casino ought to be a resort-style, tourist destination, not a downtown development, and he wants lawmakers to join him in filing an amicus curiae brief on behalf of anti-casino forces, or join their lawsuits.

Legislature Chairwoman Lynn M. Marinelli, D-Town of Tonawanda, without knowing the wishes of the full Legislature on Saturday, said a court brief could be signed by those legislators who agree with the statement, regardless of whether they form a Legislature majority.

Assemblyman Sam Hoyt, longtime critic of a Buffalo casino, plans to write the Interior Department about the inconsistency. "The official documents submitted to regulators say one thing," the Buffalo Democrat said. "The public rhetoric and the sales pitch to people who have a decision-making role in granting them a license, were something entirely different.

"I have said for years this is going to be just picking our own pockets. I am anti-casino, not for religious or moral reasons but for economic reasons."

The Senecas' recent disclosure raised serious issues within the city, which would gain a share of casino revenue and a projected 1,000 permanent casino jobs, not to mention construction jobs. "The primary economic justification for a casino in Buffalo has been that more tourist dollars will come to and stay here than will leave the host community," said Richard M. Tobe, the city's commissioner of development, permits and inspections.

He said information in the SEC document "raises the strong possibility that the Buffalo Creek Casino will have negative impacts on our local economy" and "speaks strongly against the city providing any support for the infrastructure improvements requested by the Seneca Nation around the Buffalo Creek Casino site."

Seneca Nation President Barry E. Snyder Sr. in March requested that the city provide $6 million in road, sewer, water and traffic signal improvements. Pantano did not respond specifically to Tobe's statement Saturday.

e-mail: mspina@buffnews.com

Suit Readied to Halt Casino in Buffalo

Mark Sommer, Buffalo News, 12/30/2005

A team of Buffalo attorneys backed by a prominent foundation will file a lawsuit in federal court Tuesday to stop the proposed Seneca Buffalo Creek Casino. The lawsuit will charge that the federal government did not properly apply three laws that govern the approval process for gambling activities on Indian lands and its responsibility to consider a casino's impact on the community.

Gale Norton, a Defendant

"The casino is not a done thing. It's illegal in the City of Buffalo, and we're prepared to get a judge to rule to that effect," said Robert J. Kresse, a trustee with the Wendt Foundation, which will largely finance the effort that also includes significant contributions from other foundations and individuals.

"I think it will suck all the life out of Buffalo, and it just appalls me," said Diane Bennett, a former managing partner of Hodgson Russ. Bennett is one of a number of prominent Buffalonians backing the lawsuit as a member of the newly formed Citizens for a Better Buffalo. Members met with The Buffalo News' editorial board Thursday.

Several religious leaders are expected to confirm their opposition to the casino at a news conference at 11 a.m. Tuesday in the law offices of Stenger & Finnerty.

The lawsuit will name various federal officials and agencies as defendants, including the U.S. Department of the Interior, Interior Secretary Gail Norton and the U.S. National Indian Gaming Commission.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include Citizens Against Casino Gambling in Erie County, Assemblyman Sam Hoyt and preservation organizations.

Joseph M. Finnerty of Stenger & Finnerty said more lawsuits may be filed.

Seneca Nation of Indians officials could not be reached to comment Thursday.

The Senecas had a groundbreaking on their 9-acre downtown site near the Cobblestone District on Dec. 8. Seneca leaders said they wanted to begin construction this spring and open a 100,000-square-foot casino complex on New Year's Eve 2006.

The Senecas claim the Seneca Nation Settlement Act offers legal justification for building a casino in Buffalo. The act was cited by Norton when she allowed the Niagara Falls and Buffalo casinos to go forward.

The lawsuit will argue the act does not apply to Buffalo, and that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act should have been implemented instead. That act requires an examination of the possible effects of a casino on a community.

Former Rep. John J. LaFalce, a co-sponsor of the Settlement Act, has written Norton claiming it was never intended to be used for purchasing casinos.

The lawsuit will also charge an environmental assessment required by the National Environmental Policy Act, which was conducted in Niagara Falls before the Seneca Niagara Casino opened there, should have been conducted in Buffalo.

And it will claim the federal government failed to follow the Historic Preservation Act, which requires consultation between federal and state preservation officials for properties on or eligible for placement on the National Register of Historic Places.

The site's H-O Oats grain elevator is eligible for inclusion in the historic register, and there are other historic sites in the district that could be affected by the casino.

"Anyone of these [violations], we think, would void the action of [Norton] to allow the casino to be built," said attorney Richard Lippes. "The issues we are raising are very important and solid issues, which I think the court has to consider very seriously."

Finnerty said a lawsuit wasn't filed earlier because of the uncertainty over whether the Senecas would choose land in Buffalo for a casino, and where it would be. He said a restraining order will be sought to prevent construction while the lawsuit winds through the courts.

e-mail: msommer@buffnews.com

Letter to the NFTA from Buffalo Niagara Riverkeeper

We Can't Control a Casino, But We Can Prevent It

News Analysis: Mary Bartley, October 30, 2005

Now that the Seneca Nation has begun the process to convert part of the City of Buffalo into sovereign Indian territory, our elected officials are finally saying what opponents of casino gambling have known for years: the deal that New York State cut with the Seneca Nation is a very bad deal for Buffalo. The Seneca compact is an attempt by the state to balance its budget on the backs of the state’s poorest economy. It will irreparably harm our region.

The current mantra of many of our elected officials is, “We can’t stop it, but we will control it.” Just the opposite is true! Once a casino comes to Buffalo the people of Buffalo will have no control over the casino – not over the jobs, not over how the local share is distributed, and not over what other businesses the Seneca Nation chooses to start on its newest reservation. But we can stop it! Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton could disapprove the land transfer if she hears from enough of us, especially elected officials. Lawsuits could stop it as well, and there are ample grounds for challenging this illegal land transfer and illegal casino proposal.

Wake up, Buffalo. Don’t leave our children and grandchildren a legacy of a gambling casino and a permanently broken economy.

Shameless Propaganda Masquerading as News

In today’s fast-paced media, with its focus on a short attention-span, it is easy for a distorted or false piece of information to creep into the news. Sometimes this is premeditated, as in the case of an advertisement masquerading as a “report”, or promotional material in the guise of a press-release or “study”. A newspaper under deadline might not check all of its sources all the time.

Unfortunately, misinformation, published as news, promotes ignorance and reinforces prejudice.

How does the public decide what is true and what is not? There are ways. But sometimes by the time the truth comes out it is too late.

Recently, the USA Niagara Development Corporation released a study of the Seneca Niagara Casino’s impact on the city of Niagara Falls over the past two years. The study’s project director, Kent Gardner, said that none of the business owners he interviewed reported a loss of business because of the casino. “No one said they lost business,” he said. “They just didn't gain any.”

Was Gardner relying solely on interviews to reach this conclusion? In any case, the facts in Niagara Falls don’t support it. Since the casino opened, two hotels have been foreclosed and another is for sale. One large restaurant has closed and many others are struggling. The ice skating rink on Lackey Plaza is gone. Did Gardner not interview the owners of any of these businesses?

If you get a copy of this study, you will notice something right away. The title page proclaims that the study was prepared by CGR (Center for Governmental Research) “In Partnership with Gaming & Resort and Development Inc.” (italics mine) GRD is an arm of the gambling industry. On its website, the Seneca Nation is listed as one of its clients.

To bolster some of its claims, the CGR-GRD study quotes a finding from a Harvard study: that counties in the United States with casinos grew slightly faster than non-casino counties. Ironically, Harvard itself is currently under fire for producing bogus research funded by the gambling industry.

Who commissioned the Niagara Impact Study in the first place? In a press-release of August, 2004, Charles Gargano, chairman of Empire State Development, announced the selection of a Rochester firm (CGR) to study the economic impact of Seneca Niagara Casino on the city.

Charles Gargano has been a promoter of gambling expansion for many years: In 1993 he served on the board of Alpha Hospitality, which was attempting a casino venture with the St. Regis Mohawks. As commentary on his reputation, Gargano has been the subject of many criminal investigation probes. I leave it as an imaginary assignment for the reader to check further into Mr. Gargano’s background and credentials, and how they could have a bearing on the impartiality of the study.

Recently, the Seneca Nation issued its own “report”, which president Snyder said shows that the casinos have had a “clear and positive impact on the local economy.” The report stated that the Seneca casinos generated $100 million in revenue to New York State, and $72 million in payroll during 2004. Omitted was the fact that at the same time over $300 million in gambling losses came out of the pockets of local residents. Some news media printed the report without raising any questions.

I rely on mainstream news for much of my information. Some of the local reporting on the casino issue has been informative and responsible. For example, many area newspapers dispelled the myth that casinos drove the economic growth in Niagara Falls, Canada, explaining that the casinos came later for a slice of the pie.

Too often, though, hype invades news pages. A recent caption under a picture of the Seneca Niagara hotel construction said it was “visible spinoff of the gambling site's 2 years in operation.” The hotel is on the 57 acres deeded to the Senecas in the casino deal. It is on reservation land. Like the casino and other businesses on this urban reservation, the hotel will not provide any tax revenue to the city and has an unfair tax-advantage over existing hotels. Also, a number of specialty shops are being planned within the hotel that will be guaranteed to wipe out additional businesses in the local area. This is called “spinoff”?

The casino interests can pay for propaganda, and sometimes it gets reported as news. They can also pay for extended litigation. The return on these investments is billions of dollars in personal enrichment. On the other side are the casino opponents, working on limited budgets: People like Dr. John Kindt, of Illinois, Dr. Earl Grinols, of Texas, and Tom Grey, Director of the National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling. These people do not reap any monetary reward for their efforts.

Reminiscent of the battle against Big Tobacco, the casino controversy is a David-and-Goliath struggle for truth against big-money deception. There is much at stake. As Dr. Guy C. Clark, Chairman of NCALG says: “Gambling has always been among the most selfish of human activities – people seeking to take other people’s money with nothing of value exchanged. State governments have become so egocentric that they are willing to sacrifice the health and welfare of their citizens. Across the nation, legislators trade health and hope for the future in exchange for this year’s budget. America is falling victim to false hopes and empty lies advanced by greed, compromised academics and corrupt politics.”

-- John Bartley, August 27, 2005

There's no positive spin on Buffalo casino

Mary Bartley, September 2, 2005

Of all the mistakes that have been made in Buffalo, none would be as devastating to our downtown core as the proposed downtown casino. It would permanently remove a prime piece of downtown from the tax rolls, and it would deal a death blow to the downtown and surrounding business areas. And, unlike the Skyway and the above-ground section of the rapid transit system, turning a piece of our city into a Seneca reservation is a decision which could never be undone.

The Seneca Nation recently issued a report offering "proof" that its Niagara Falls and Cattauraugus casinos are a huge success for their host communities. The report shows nothing of the kind.

The Seneca Gaming Corp. brags that it is second only to Delphi among Niagara County employers. But the vast majority of casino jobs are minimum wage, and many are part time -- hardly comparable to Delphi jobs in salary or benefits. Economists studying the effect of casinos on employment have shown in numerous studies that, for every casino job gained, localities lose two jobs, due to cannibalization of the local economy.

Particularly disingenuous is the portrayal of the new Seneca hotel as a spinoff. It is simply a way of shifting the Falls hospitality industry from the hotels that are currently there to this new (non tax-paying) hotel on Indian territory. Another spinoff is the transfer by eminent domain of the water park from private ownership to ownership by the Seneca Nation.

So, what does this mean for the City of Buffalo?

A Buffalo casino would be a "convenience casino," deriving its revenue almost entirely from local residents. At best, locals will gamble with money that would otherwise be spent at restaurants and theaters, or to buy consumer goods. At worst, it they will gamble with the grocery and rent money.

Casino advocates tell us it takes three to five years for the casinos to do their economic development magic. (How convenient, since Buffalo is being asked to establish its casino just shy of three years from the opening of the Seneca Niagara casino). But, outside of Las Vegas, there is not one area where casinos have fulfilled this promise. What we see in cities like Detroit and Atlantic City is urban blight and increased crime, bankruptcy and gambling addiction. What we don't see is economic prosperity.

Past generations of Buffalonians left us a legacy of outstanding cultural institutions, world famous architecture and beautiful parks. Will our legacy to our children and grandchildren be that we sacrificed our city for the empty promise of a gambling casino? We can and must refuse to let this happen.

Mary Bartley is co-chairperson of Citizens Against Casino Gambling in Erie County.