Jump to content

Casino in Downtown Grand Rapids?

GRDadof3

By GRDadof3
in Grand Rapids

Should Grand Rapids consider promoting a casino downtown  

94 members have voted

  1. 1. Should downtown GR have a casino?

    • Yes, bring it on!
      35
    • No, not the right direction for downtown
      47
    • Maybe, depending on location
      12

Recommended Posts

torgo Town

torgo

Posted
Posted

They are designed that way. The reason for being "bunker'd" is that it prohibits the mind from realising reality exists. You are more isolated from the outside world and this is supposed to help encourage you to gamble more. Its the same philosphy that is used with nickle and dime slots, put the ones that pay out the most and more frequently in the front where there is more foot traffic. The idea behind that is so it can attract more of your impulse gamblers.

Yah, I've heard that, I just thought the article did a job of pointing out that they can be positive contributors to an urban fabric, at least in terms of architecture. ;)

They are designed that way. The reason for being "bunker'd" is that it prohibits the mind from realising reality exists. You are more isolated from the outside world and this is supposed to help encourage you to gamble more. Its the same philosphy that is used with nickle and dime slots, put the ones that pay out the most and more frequently in the front where there is more foot traffic. The idea behind that is so it can attract more of your impulse gamblers.

Yah, I've heard that, I just thought the article did a job of pointing out that they can be positive contributors to an urban fabric, at least in terms of architecture. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply
GRDadof3 Ecumenopolis

GRDadof3

Posted
  • Author
Posted

They are designed that way. The reason for being "bunker'd" is that it prohibits the mind from realising reality exists. You are more isolated from the outside world and this is supposed to help encourage you to gamble more. Its the same philosphy that is used with nickle and dime slots, put the ones that pay out the most and more frequently in the front where there is more foot traffic. The idea behind that is so it can attract more of your impulse gamblers.

I've heard the slots with the best odds are in McCarran Airport (Las Vegas). That way there's a good chance you'll hit when you arrive, and when you are getting ready to leave to keep you coming back for more. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunlover38 Whistle-Stop

Sunlover38

Posted
Posted

I can agree with that. Trade shows and conferences that I have been to seem to be more of an excuse to go to another city/area and party. It usually involves salespeople/buyers/reps who are generally more of the sociable persuasion, and they look more forward to going out afterward then sitting in on another "Here's how to improve the bottom line or increase sales" discussion :sick: A casino is definitely part of that package.

How does GR's convention center survive at all then? There are plenty of casinos in Michigan as it is .. . . and if that is what the conventioneers want then why do they come to GR now instead of going to the plethera of existing choicse? I am not saying a casino in Wayland would be a good thing, but I don't see how it would affect GR in the horrendous way being portrayed . . . and it certainly does not merit putting the casino in downtown GR. bleh . . . sure didn't help Detroit now did it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRDadof3 Ecumenopolis

GRDadof3

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If you look at the current Devos Place Schedule, you will notice many of the groups that are being booked now are church groups, school associations, small clubs, etc.. There was an article just recently that while these groups are fine, they are not the big spending business conventions that the CAA would LOVE to attract. These event planners are looking for a total package that I don't think can be met here currently. I don't think a casino in Wayland will KILL downtown, but it won't help. And I don't think a casino is any economic "saviour" to tie any hopes to, we do need to look at promoting more "adult-friendly" entertainment options downtown, other than just bars. ONE casino may be an option. I say one because I don't think we need more than that.

But others might disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
houseofdon Whistle-Stop

houseofdon

Posted
Posted

There have been several of you asking for some hard numbers about what a casino would do to the area. Well, it's already been done, but not many people know about it!!

A couple years ago, the Anderson Economic Group did a thorough analysis of the Gun Lake Casino. This was an independent, unbiased report done by a reputable economic firm. Let's just say that their findings were much different than the "study" that the tribe and its Las Vegas financiers published.

It can be found here: http://www.andersoneconomicgroup.com/modul..._aeg&doc_ID=500

It's a pretty substantial document, so for those of you who don't want to read through it, let me give you the Cliff's notes. The net loss over 10 years is about $300 million dollars and a net loss of 3000 jobs. Kent County would be taking the bulk of that blow. Allegan County is the ONLY area that would see net gains, everything else would be a loss.

I'll go out on a limb and say that I've researched and done more work about this casino than most, so I'll urge you guys to take my word for it that a casino in Wayland is bad news for W. Mich and GR specifically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rizzo City

Rizzo

Posted
Posted

Nothing has been taken from and distributed to the populous. Money, Land, or other trust hasn't been issued to other parties. If there is such a perceived threat to Grand Rapids from said casino then it is imperative to stop it, but this is hardly communism. If you notice, various laws have demonstrated that if an establishment is so disruptive to the majority of citizens then it is deemed non beneficial and not allowed to continue... Is this communism, no this is the will of the people asserting the responsibility to protect.

Do we call eminent domain communism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Miller Whistle-Stop

Mark Miller

Posted
Posted

As someone who lives within walking distance to downtown, I would be adamantly opposed to such a use. This is not because I am opposed to people gambling, but rather because casinos have demonstrated that they bring with them crime, poverty and other ills, in almost every location that they go.

They also do very little for the public realm or urbanism. Just their very typology is designed to deprive the senses of the passage of time. They do this by creating windowless places, that are easy to get into and hard to get out of. Despite what the New Urbanists are proposing in Mississippi, I have yet to see a casino that actually fits into any context properly.

There are far better ways to envigorate downtowns.

As Jim Kunstler says, casinos are the epitomy of the new American Dream, which is the desire to "get something for nothing".

For this reason, I am opposed to placing casinos anywhere, except in Las Vegas and Atlantic City, both of which are too far gone anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Far Away Unincorporated Area

Far Away

Posted
Posted

As someone who lives within walking distance to downtown, I would be adamantly opposed to such a use. This is not because I am opposed to people gambling, but rather because casinos have demonstrated that they bring with them crime, poverty and other ills, in almost every location that they go.

They also do very little for the public realm or urbanism. Just their very typology is designed to deprive the senses of the passage of time. They do this by creating windowless places, that are easy to get into and hard to get out of. Despite what the New Urbanists are proposing in Mississippi, I have yet to see a casino that actually fits into any context properly.

There are far better ways to envigorate downtowns.

As Jim Kunstler says, casinos are the epitomy of the new American Dream, which is the desire to "get something for nothing".

For this reason, I am opposed to placing casinos anywhere, except in Las Vegas and Atlantic City, both of which are too far gone anyway.

I agree completely.

Here is the link for an article in my neck of the woods about casinos (the casino capital of California). When I came to this area there were 3 casinos. The floodgates were opened a few years ago for widespread expansions--now, there are 8 casinos, many currently expanding, and many new casinos on the way. Here in San Diego, I think that the social and environmental costs far outweigh the economic benefits and entertainment value.

Growth of Indian gaming sends ripples of change off county's reservations

Link to comment
Share on other sites
torgo Town

torgo

Posted
Posted

Clearly there appear to be both postive and negative effects of casinos. I suppose it depends on where one's priorities lie. Personally, I am kind of torn on the subject. And not to start an argument, but a law preventing certain types of development isn't necessarily communistic, but a blanket law banning a certain kind of development would likely be considered un-democratic.

Anyways, that's my $0.02

Link to comment
Share on other sites
torgo Town

torgo

Posted
Posted

I would argue that a blanketing law that says "No casinos shall be built in Kent County" would be un-democratic. Of course, I am in favor of doing things by the will of the people, and referendum votes on controversial mega-developments such as casinos would be a good thing. But to totally ban them (or any development I don't want around) outright with one sweeping law doesn't strike me as democratic. I would think you would have to deny them on a case-by-case basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rizzo City

Rizzo

Posted
Posted

Even if a law like that was enacted, and it was supported by the will of the people it is still democratic. No matter how "unjust" in the eyes of some, if a majority supports said law then it is democratic. (banning gay marriage.) I'm mostly applying this to the casino in Wayland. If it is to be as harmful as reports have shown on downtown and the metro then this would justify a public involvement to stop the casino from happening. But, of course this is a Native American casino, which if I remember correctly is soverign territory, so I really don't think any public outcry or legal power is possible. Just to clearify, I believe in the philospihy, "keep your enemies closer" in this situation. So I think if someone has to choose to build a casino in Wayland or Downtown, I would much rather it be downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DSchoon Whistle-Stop

DSchoon

Posted
Posted

The overwhelming opinion is West Michigan is "no" to any casinos. Too bad tribal sovereignty trumps "the will of the people." The whole legislation surrounding tribal casinos is such a mess, I don't even know how to begin to explain it!

Really?

There are 4,000 members of the Friends of the Gun Lake Tribe in support of it. If I recall, that's about 30 times the combined membership of 23 is Enough and MichGo. I'd argue that the majority of people in West Michigan are very much in favor of driving to Wayland instead of Mt. Pleasant, Michigan City or Detroit.

The arguements against a casino just don't hold water, it will be nothing but good for Grand Rapids.

I mean really, DeVos Place isn't going to lose any business to a casino. A state-of-the-art, riverside urban facility isn't going to share any clients with a casino's exhibition hall. When was the last time you heard about a convention at Soaring Eagle or Blue Chip? Never.

And the tribal legislation is easy to explain--this was tribal land first, so they should be able to do with it what they want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
houseofdon Whistle-Stop

houseofdon

Posted
Posted

Really?

There are 4,000 members of the Friends of the Gun Lake Tribe in support of it. If I recall, that's about 30 times the combined membership of 23 is Enough and MichGo. I'd argue that the majority of people in West Michigan are very much in favor of driving to Wayland instead of Mt. Pleasant, Michigan City or Detroit.

The arguements against a casino just don't hold water, it will be nothing but good for Grand Rapids.

I mean really, DeVos Place isn't going to lose any business to a casino. A state-of-the-art, riverside urban facility isn't going to share any clients with a casino's exhibition hall. When was the last time you heard about a convention at Soaring Eagle or Blue Chip? Never.

And the tribal legislation is easy to explain--this was tribal land first, so they should be able to do with it what they want.

First, MichGO was able to gather 10,000 signatures in the Gun Lake/Dorr area alone in opposition of the Gun Lake Casino. Second, even though Proposal 1 didn't encompass tribal gaming due to sovereignty issues, it sent the overwhelming message that Michigan voters think that casino expansion should be slowed down and they should have the right to vote on any further proliferation. By and large, Michigan citizens do NOT want more casinos.

And second, the reason Soaring Eagle or Blue Chip hasn't held conferences is because they don't have conference facilities. Of course conferences won't be held there! But last I heard, the projected plan for Gun Lake was to have full conference facilities, restaurants, hotels, etc. This would be a direct hit to DeVos' ability to draw clients. Not only conferences, but take a look at concerts. Think of all the quality acts that have been drawn to Mt. Pleasant lately instead of playing GR venues?

Let's get something perfectly clear here, a casino would be an economic catastrophe to GR. Not to mention all of the social ills that come along with a casino. I could go on and on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.