Press Releases from No Casino Gettysburg & Select News Stories--see "latest press releases" for most current release-
10/9/06 Man to be Charged for Death Threats Against No Casino Gettysburg Members
Randy V Adams, age 24, was charged Tuesday, Oct. 10, 2006 for sending threats via e-mail to officers and members of No Casino Gettysburg. The man was identified by Cumberland Township Police after several months of investigation, confronted by Detective Tim Guise, and confessed to the crimes on 6/12/06. Police waited to charge him until the man’s computers were examined at the crime lab in Harrisburg. Charges filed at District Judge Beauchat's office in Gettysburg included 18 counts of harrassment and 10 counts of terroristic threats. The largely obscene messages included death threats toward Susan Star Paddock, Chair of No Casino Gettysburg, and threats of sexual and violent crimes against family and children of No Casino advocates. People who posted on the grass roots group’s website message board seemed to be the targets, so the threats were sent to cities across the U.S., with the largest number locally. According to Paddock, the threats, received over several months, were frightening to her and others receiving them. “We were all afraid, but decided we needed to continue fighting the casino for the good of the community. We are relieved and grateful for the careful work of Cumberland Township Detective Tim Guise in apprehending this individual.
“We hope Mr. Adams is able to receive appropriate psychiatric help. We are unaware of a formal connection he has with any organization. Unfortunately, he is an example of how, even in proposal form, the casino and the divisiveness it has brought to our community negatively impact the most vulnerable members of our society.”
9/26/06 Ban on Gettysburg Casino Removed from Reform Bill; Adams Must Still Share $10 million with neighboring counties. Today, the Senate rules committee took the amendment banning a casino in Adams County OUT of SB 862, which they will consider tomorrow. The Senate also removed the provision that would have given the full $10 million share assessment to 6th class host counties, so there is no ban on the casino, but any money from the State for hosting the casino here is shared with all surrounding counties.
These absences from the bill have the following effects:
1. The Crossroads promises of $10-16 million to Adams County are based on a change to ACT 71, the gambling law. All the casinos must send $10 million to the state. For 6th class counties like Adams and Monroe County (home to another applicant in the Poconos) the money is doled out in grants to the host county and all contiguous counties, Franklin, Cumberland, York, for economic development. All these counties have greater economic development needs than Adams.
There have been several attempts to make Adams the sole recipient of these grants if the 5000 slots casino is licensed here, but those have all failed. Last night Steve Nickol told us that his amendment to change the distribution has been pulled from Act 862, the omnibus bill the Senate is now considering to alter Act 71. That means that a casino windfall is NO LONGER A POSSIBILITY for Adams County. Straban Township receives the ONLY guaranteed money, just $455,000, for hosting the casino. Straban solicitor Wally Davis testified before the House Committee on Tourism that they would have to raise taxes if that does not change. So it looks like changing that is dead.
The Borough agreement with Crossroads demands the Borough beg grants from Straban, the County and the State for money, and if they can't raise the million that way, then and only then will Crossroads step up to the plate. Looks like there won't be much received from Adams or Straban--because they won't have anything to share. The $10 million to Adams for hosting 5000 slots is just one more empty promise.
2. Regarding removal of the ban on an Adams County casino: We regret that the Senate did not show the courage of the House, (who passed the ban unanimously) but perhaps, since most Senators believe Crossroads will never be licensed, they didn’t want to waste the state’s money.
The amendment was Crossroads last opportunity to get reimbursed for costs of the casino application. Now they’ll leave the PGCB on Dec 20 empty handed. We are glad that Crossroads will receive no compensation for so callously dividing our community over the last 17 months.
Today, the Senate rules committee took the amendment banning a casino in Adams County OUT of SB 862, which they will consider tomorrow. The Senate also removed the provision that would have given the full $10 million share assessment to 6th class host counties, so there is no ban on the casino, but any money from the State for hosting the casino here is shared with all surrounding counties.These absences from the bill have the following effects:1. The Crossroads promises of $10-16 million to Adams County are based on a change to ACT 71, the gambling law. All the casinos must send $10 million to the state. For 6th class counties like Adams and Monroe County (home to another applicant in the Poconos) the money is doled out in grants to the host county and all contiguous counties, Franklin, Cumberland, York, for economic development. All these counties have greater economic development needs than Adams. There have been several attempts to make Adams the sole recipient of these grants if the 5000 slots casino is licensed here, but those have all failed. Last night Steve Nickol told us that his amendment to change the distribution has been pulled from Act 862, the omnibus bill the Senate is now considering to alter Act 71. Straban Township receives the ONLY guaranteed money, just $455,000, for hosting the casino. . So it looks like changing that is dead. The Borough agreement with Crossroads demands the Borough beg grants from Straban, the County and the State for money, and if they can't raise the million that way, then and only then will Crossroads step up to the plate. Looks like there won't be much received from Adams or Straban--because they won't have anything to share. 2. Regarding removal of the ban on an Adams County casino:
9/25/06 Web Poll Voters Say No Casino by Wide Margins
"Do you favor the establishment of a slot machine casino near Gettysburg?"
Two recent internet polls asking about that show votes heavily weighted against the Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa. Today the York Dispatch (www.yorkdispatch.com) reported they had 1,369 responses, with 69.8% saying NO to the question, and 30.2% saying yes. The York Dispatch website had software barring more than one vote from a computer.
WGAL-TV http://www.wgal.com/news/9753836/detail.html also ran a poll asking about Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa, proposed for the corner of Rts 15 and 30 in Adams County. As of 9/25/06 “Do you support building a slots parlor at the Gettysburg site?” brought 8,120 votes, 63% no and 37% yes.
Previous web polls have shown similar results.
2/28/2006, CNN.com poll, 91,991 responded, 72% opposed the Gettysburg site.
4/24/06 Frederick News Post Poll, 73% opposed the Gettysburg site.
The Chair of No Casino Gettysburg commented that “These polls are definitely not scientific, but they do indicate that opposition to Crossroads proposal is widespread. They reinforce the findings of two scientific polls, which show a majority opposed."
July 2005, Phone Survey of 300 Adams County Voters done independently by Susquehanna Polling and Research: 54% opposed, only 31% approved of a Gettysburg Casino. 53% feel it would take away from the historic significance of the region.
Oct. 27-29, 2005 Phone Survey of 625 Pennsylvania Voters by Mason-Dixon Polling. 65% overall opposed a Gettysburg casino (in Central PA it is 78%) 56% would blame the governor and legislators if it were built. 56% of Democrats and 75% of Republicans opposed this one casino.
July 2/3, 2005 Survey of 300 Heritage Tourists in Gettysburg by No Casino Gettysburg 96% of tourists oppose a casino in Adams County. 53% of the tourists surveyed said they would not return here if Gettysburg had a nearby casino. 81% felt that if Gettysburg had a casino it would desecrate a sacred atmosphere. 68% felt that it would damage a family friendly environment, which is one of the main reasons people come here. No published poll has shown any majority support for the casino.
No Casino Comments on Ownership Disclosure of Crossroads 8/20/06
Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa, LP, ownership structure: 74% MS PA Gaming Holdings, Inc (a subsidiary of Morgan Stanley.) MS PA Gaming also owns 1% of Crossroads GP, Inc. Director: Michael C. Garrity, formerly listed as an investor. David LeVan 7.5% Heather Kutz 1.97% Peter Ressler 1.97% Bonnie Wortman 1.78% (wife of William Wortman, owner of Millennium, which owns the Meadows, category 1 racino.) Michael Serlucco 1.71% Gary Wienken 1.71% Jennifer LeVan 1.61% Robert Bales 1.61% Alan Hassman 1.61% James Quillen 1.05% Barbara Ernico .86% Elizabeth Eelkeema .82% Thomas Willer .80% Two days before its release by the Pa Gaming Control Board, Crossroads has released their ownership data. We now know for certain what we have suspected for months, that CEO David LeVan owns a minor share, just 7.5% of the proposed casino. With his wife Jennifer’s share, the LeVan’s control only 9.1% of the 5000 slots casino. The financial control of the casino, 75%, falls to a new subsidiary of Morgan Stanley, a multi-national corporation. MS PA Gaming Holdings, Inc, directed by Michael C. Garrity, may specialize in financially strapped groups like Crossroads. According to the Philadelphia Enquirer 5/18/06 http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/business/14605209
Donald Trump “emerged from bankruptcy protection with a $500 million line of credit from Morgan Stanley as part of a restructuring." MS Holdings is also behind TrumpStreet Casino proposed for Philadelphia, and a new casino planned for Atlantic City with Hard Rock, International.
Susan Star Paddock, Chair of No casino Gettysburg, said that “Some locals have supported Crossroads because they trusted CEO David LeVan to have control over what happened with the casino. They will be shocked to discover that the LeVan family owns little more than 9% of this project.
“The Gettysburg Borough Council, which negotiated over several months with Crossroads, never had an opportunity to speak with MS PA Gaming Holdings and was never informed of the true owners of the planned casino. The Straban Township Zoning Board and Supervisors, the Chamber of Commerce, the County Commissioners, and the people of Adams County have never met the principal members in this firm. Indeed, by advertising in the Gettysburg Times that “Crossroads is a project of locally-based Chance Enterprises”, we feel that Crossroads deliberately misled Adams County. Their ads put a folksy face on what is actually a multi-national corporation with little knowledge of local culture or needs.”
“The only investors connected with this who have any connection with Adams County are David and Jennifer LeVan, who live here, and Barbara Ernico, who works here as program manager of the Robert C. Hoffmann Charitable Trust. Altogether they own less than 10%.”
CEO's come and go and a 10% share is meaningless, when faced with a 75% juggernaut. In short this debate and this project has nothing to do with David LeVan, it has to do with how a secretive multinational corporation will treat our community in the years to come.”
Whether one is for or against the casino, it is essential that Adams County knows with whom they are dealing. Otherwise, we end up with risky agreements between the cynically ambitious and the politically naïve.”
Investigative questions:
Did the Borough Council know this when they signed the agreement with Crossroads? Did the Chamber of Commerce Board know this when they ignored 68.75% of the Chamber membership who voted opposing the Chamber’s pro-casino stance. Have the Straban zoning commission and supervisors been informed about who they are dealing with in the zoning/ planning process?
How do pro-casino members, many of whom are 1st amendment/property rights oriented and NOT oriented to large corporations and state control, feel about the tiny percentage owned by LeVan?
How will PGCB react when they discover that Crossroads supporters may have been misled to think this was a local venture? Does this show lack of character in the applicant? Does Wortman’s wife’s interest in this casino violate Act 71 prohibition against investment in both a category 1 and category 2 casino? Does MS PA Gaming being involved in TWO category two casinos violate any gaming law?
MS PA Gaming Holding seems to specialize in financially distressed companies like Hard Rock Intl and Trump. Are they the equivalent of buyers of distressed properties? Why have they been so secretive?
Press Release 8/7/06 From: No Casino Gettysburg-- a non-profit, grass roots citizen action committee.
And the 164 members of Businesses Against the Casino Borough Agreement May Be Illegal Under Gaming Law
The Borough Council of Gettysburg is preparing to sign an agreement with Crossroads Gaming Resort to support Crossroads’ application for a 5000 slot casino license, in return for an annual “gift” or “grant” of $1 million. According to Act 71, the gaming law, this agreement may be illegal and kick Chance out of the running for the license. Contained within Act 71 is a small section which outlines the financial fitness requirements for slot machine license applicants in the state of Pennsylvania. Within Section 1313 is a short part stating that casino applicants are not to establish side agreements using casino revenue. Specifically part (E) of this section, states ...”An applicant that includes... a distribution of terminal revenue in excess of the amounts provide in section(s)... 1407 (Relating to Pennsylvania Gaming Economic Development Tourism Funds) shall not be deemed a financially successful, viable or efficient business operation and shall not be approved for a slot machine license.” (Act 71 Section 1313 part E)
All the proposed casinos are required to set aside $10 million to be returned to the state for grants via the “local share”. These funds would then be used to offset the direct and indirect costs of the casino on the local area. As the State sees it, this is already enough money set aside for local governments to preclude the need for any additional side agreements. While the entire $10 million would be granted to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, 6th class counties like Adams must apply for grants to the State Dept of Economic Development for this money, competing for those grants with all contiguous counties: York, Franklin and Cumberland. The allocation of local share revenues is currently waiting to be debated in the Senate, but under the current law, the only money guaranteed to Adams County is $455,000 to Straban Township.
The Crossroads agreement requires the Borough to apply for these grants and says they will throw in additional money, up to $1 million, if the Borough cannot get the grants from the County, Straban Township or the State. Under this agreement, if the Borough can get this money through the pre-existing grants process, Crossroads would not have to give the Borough anything.
Crossroads seems to be offering Gettysburg money in excess of the funds mandated by Section 1407, which are set aside in the local share. By guaranteeing Gettysburg $1 million, it seems that they are now committing excessive revenues to off set the costs of the casino.
According to Susan Star Paddock, Chair of No Casino Gettysburg, “While we don’t know if this is definitely illegal or not, once the Borough of Gettysburg finalizes its negotiations with Chance and signs an agreement to receive grants from Crossroads, No Casino Gettysburg intends to forward a copy to the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) for their attorneys to scrutinize.”
“Not only did the Borough sell their sworn testimony to the PGCB, with future advertising privileges, in exchange for an agreement that appears to be little more than a grant application, they did so with no investigation of the actual costs that would incur from this operation. Our research shows that $62.4 million will be siphoned out of current retail sales in this county by the casino, and that local gamblers will spend $39 million in the casino and its 4 restaurants. That’s why 164 local business owners, including 10 restaurants and over 25 hotels and bed and breakfasts, are part of Businesses Against the Casino, and why 130 Chamber members opposed the Chamber’s pro-casino stance. We are appalled that 6 of nine members of the Borough Council, several of whom will say privately that the casino will likely never be licensed, or who know it would harm Gettysburg and their own businesses if licensed, are still voting for this only to pacify one minority share investor they perceive as the Borough’s sugar daddy.”
Additional sources: A news report by Scot Pitzer in the Gettysburg Times7/18/06 says, "A stipulation within the yet-to-be-finalized pact is that council must execute a 'good faith effort' annually when attempting to seize a portion of the gaming facility's windfall. Furthermore, the borough must show, and document, that it has performed a good faith effort." "In order to receive the promised $1M, the borough would have to apply yearly for the money, specifying the projects--either directly or indirectly related to the gaming facility--it would intend using the funds to support. Crossroads' officials, of course, would have to approve of the borough's grant requests."
(Comment: Chance has said there are NO downsides to the casino, and there is a tremendous economic benefit, so we wonder what expenses they would approve)
Today’s Gettysburg Times has an additional cover story on the agreement.
The LAW:
Below is a copy of the entire section 1313 of Act 71, a highlighted section of Part E, and a copy of section 1407 outlining the Economic Development Tourism fund.
“NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF THIS PART TO THE CONTRARY, AN
APPLICANT THAT INCLUDES A COMMITMENT OR PROMISE TO PAY A SLOT
MACHINE LICENSE FEE IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT PROVIDED IN SECTION
1209 OR A DISTRIBUTION OF TERMINAL REVENUE IN EXCESS OF THE
AMOUNTS PROVIDED IN SECTIONS 1403, 1405 (RELATING TO
PENNSYLVANIA RACE HORSE DEVELOPMENT FUND) AND 1407 (RELATING TO
PENNSYLVANIA GAMING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOURISM FUND) SHALL NOT
BE DEEMED A FINANCIALLY SUCCESSFUL, VIABLE OR EFFICIENT BUSINESS
OPERATION AND SHALL NOT BE APPROVED FOR A SLOT MACHINE LICENSE.”
151 Businesses Against the Casino, Some Challenged Chamber Board
6/28/06
The blue neon No Casino sign in the showcase window of Gettysburg Antiques.com declares owner Diane Smith’s opinion about the proposed Crossroads Gaming Resort proposed for Rts. 15 and 30 in Gettysburg. Smith joined Businesses Against the Casino because, as she said, “If there’s a casino there’s no more business.” Her sign was crafted by another member, designer Tim Flagg, who owns Glass Flagg on Washington Street in Gettysburg.
Ms. Smith and Mr. Flagg are two of 151 business owners on a confidential list turned in to the Pa. Gaming Control Board. Smith said that the petition she has in her store has been signed by almost every customer, although she does not promote it. She has heard many customers say they would not return if a casino were built. Although nearly half of the group remains confidential, Gettysburg Antiques has also been listed on the casino opposition group’s website nocasinogettysburg.com as a supporter.
Some of the Businesses Against the Casino were among the 17 Chamber Members who challenged the Adams County Chamber of Commerce Board’s 6 to7 vote to take a pro casino stance. These dissenting Chamber members asked the Chamber to have a general membership meeting to vote on whether the Chamber should take a neutral stance, feeling that a neutral stance would be less divisive than either a pro or no casino stance. Instead, the Chamber Board rejected the meeting idea and a motion to simply take a neutral stance, and decided to poll the members with three questions: Whether the Chamber should remain pro-casino, take a neutral stance, or take a no casino stance.
68.75% of Chamber of Commerce Members Oppose Chamber Board's's Pro Casino Stance!
6/30/06 The Chamber of Commerce Board voted 7-6 to take a pro casino position. Members of the Chamber dissented, so the Chamber conducted a poll. They threw out 25 of the 214 ballots. Of the rest, 68 wanted the Chamber to go back to the neutral position it had adopted first. 62 wanted the Chamber to oppose the casino. 59 wanted the Chamber to keep its Pro-casino position. So 31.4% supported the pro stance. Adding the neutrals and no casino votes,68.75% opposed the Chamber's pro casino stance..
Chance has criticized Businesses Against the Casino as owners who don’t want to pay their employees more wages, but owners disagree with that. For example, Gettysburg Health Administrators employees 90 people, 65 in Gettysburg and 25 in Frederick. They have very low turnover, (the newest employee has been there two years) and all their employees have a full benefits package, and start employees at a high wage.
Doris Martin, owner of Keystone Inn at 231 Hanover Street, displays her No Casino Gettysburg sign in the front yard. She says the sign has “not hurt my business at all. We have never had a guest say the casino would be good, and we’ve heard only negative responses from guests about it.” Doris objects to the casino because of economics. “It’s going to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, and we’ll fall apart in the middle. When the distance between rich and poor is too great it causes the demise of democracy. I think it’s the job of the rich to help the poor, not make them poorer.”
Businesses Against the Casino includes many small and large family businesses, insurance companies, a funeral home, a grocery store, construction industry, factory, antique stores, historic outfitters, nine restaurants, many bed and breakfasts, hotels, art galleries and the agricultural industry.
Businesses Against the Casino testified April 7, 2006 before the PGCB during hearings on the proposed casino. The testimony was given by fiscal analyst Michael Siegel, who critiqued Chance Enterprises local Impact Report. The analysis predicts that the casino will suck $62.4 million of existing retail spending out of Adams County and into the casino.
Press Contacts for Businesses Against the Casino in Adams County - please e-mail susan@nocasinogettysburg.com or call 717-334-6333
PGCB Gettysburg Hearings Testimony 86% Against Casino
Three of three PGCB hearings on the Gettysburg Casino have been heavily weighted AGAINST the Casino.
These tallies exclude Chance Enterprises, which spoke for 40 minutes each day and an additional 15 minutes on 5/17/06. The tallies are not official, but made by attendees. Total Speakers 114 No Casino 98 (86%) Pro-Casino 16 (14%)
These unofficial numbers do not include the many people who were unable to speak in public because of scheduling conflicts, etc, or because they were not allowed to by the PGCB, who appeared on the wrong day, or arrived to testify after the hearings, scheduled to go till 6, adjourned at 2:30 or noon. Some of these submitted written testimony, and the tallies also do not include written testimony, which can still be submitted until June 2.
86% of public speakers at the PGCB hearings were against the casino.
Susan Star Paddock, Chair person of No Casino Gettysburg, commented, “Since the purpose of the hearings was to determine community support of the casino, we believe the evidence seen by the Board shows overwhelming opposition. Chance has not satisfied this criteria of garnering community support, so we feel the board is justified in denying their license at the close of official testimony on June 2.”
Paddock added, “This proposal has fractured our community well being for over a year, and even in proposal form it threatens the identity of this most historic and beloved small town in America. We are just beginning another heritage tourist season, and with the casino issue still unresolved, this will be a second summer of anguish for locals and visitors. We hope the investors, the PGCB or the legislature will soon end this torture, so we can all get back to our strength of being gracious hosts to the world.
Notes: Incomplete, unofficial list of Groups Submitting Testimony to the PGCB Against the Casino. We were surprised at every hearing by groups and individuals we know nothing of standing up to oppose this “really dumb idea”. The dates represent dates these speakers spoke or were scheduled. State and National groups in italics are classed as individuals and get 3 min to testify; Others get 10 minutes.
Adams County Farm Bureau, 4/7
Adams County Fruit Growers Association, 4/7
Adams County Grange, 4/5
Adams County Green Party- 4/7
Adams County Medical Society –4/7
Adams Rescue Mission, 4/7
Associated Builder Contractors, 4/5
Association of West Point Graduates and Association of the US Army
(will submit written testimony, speaker disallowed on 5/17.)
Businesses Against the Casino in Adams County—representing 131 businesses, 4/7
Child Evangelism Fellowship, 4/7
Concerned Citizens of Straban Township, 4/5
Civil War Preservation Trust- 5/17
Fairfield Mennonite Church, 5/17/06
Freedom Valley Worship Center, 4/7,
Friends of the National Parks at Gettysburg—4/5
Gettysburg Baptist Church, 4/5
Gettysburg College Faculty-, 4/5
Gettysburg College Students Against the Casino—5/17
Gettysburg Guard 5/17
Gettysburg College Civil War Club 4/5
Gettysburg College Parents Council 4/5
Gettysburg Civil War Roundtable- 4/7
Kiwanis International of Adams County, 4/7
Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg, 5/17
Lt. Col. Andrew Jackson Grover CWRT, 4/7
National Parks Conservation Association- 4/7
National Trust for Historic Preservation—4/7
No Casino Gettysburg - 4/5
Order of the Confederate Rose- Gettysburg Chapter –5/17
Pittsburgh Civil War Roundtable- submit written testimony
Pennsylvania Council of Churches—4/5
PA Lincoln Highway Heritage Corridor –Adams County 5/17
The Sons of Confederate Veterans- Gettysburg Chapter–5/17
Church of the Brethren, 5/17
Casino Free PA, 4/7
4/10/06
Chamber supports casino by one vote
The Gettysburg-Adams Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors recently came out in favor of the casino, by a 7-6 vote of the 18 member Board. They didn’t poll their membership. They met at least twice with Crossroads, and after numerous requests, five members finally met with No Casino the day before their 2/17/06 vote. “They didn’t want us to say they’d never heard our side,” said Susan Star Paddock, Chair of No Casino Gettysburg. On 2/17/06 the Board voted to remain neutral, but on 3/3/06 they voted 7-6 to support the Crossroads proposal.
Last year, the Chambers of Grand Rapids, MI and Woodland, WA voted to oppose a potential casino after studying the issue. The State Chamber of Hawaii has also rejected casinos as detrimental to their tourist industry. We wonder what these Chambers studied that differs from our local Chamber. We hope that Chamber President Carolyn Smith will release their data.
The Chamber Board’s choice has posed an issue for some Chamber members, who are letting their Board know what they think. At least 12 Chamber members have already testified in the PGCB hearings against the casino.
Businesses Against the Casino includes many Chamber businesses. Since the announcement other Chamber members have asked to be added to the list.
Businesses against the Casino first met last May. It is a short term organization which will disband as soon as the casino issue is completely dead. Currently there are 96 businesses listed, 91 of which are in Adams County.
We welcome anyone who wants to be listed, free, in Businesses Against the Casino. The final list will be submitted as official testimony to the PGCB by the June 2, 2006 deadline.
Businesses Against the Casino presented testimony 4/7/06 which contradicted Chance’s claim that existing Adams County business would benefit from a casino.
Consultant Mike Siegel completely refuted Chance’s claim that Vicksburg casinos are good for business. (This testimony is downloadable as “A realistic assessment “ by Mike Siegel at www.nocasinogettysburg.com )
“Chance’s Local Impact Report relies in large part on Vicksburg as a model of how its casino would affect Gettysburg and the surrounding area. Chance says that visitation to Vicksburg National Military Park (NMP) was unaffected by the introduction of gambling to the area. This is not the case. In 1994, the first full calendar year after the opening of Vicksburg’s first casinos, visitation to Vicksburg NMP fell 21 percent. Through 2004 there were only two years when visitation to the park equaled or slightly exceeded the 1993 level, when gambling first came to town. In the five years previous to the casinos’ introduction, Vicksburg’s visitation had been growing an average of five percent per year.
In contrast, visitation to Gettysburg National Military Park has increased by 21 percent over the same time period. Given the importance of tourists to Adams County and the Borough of Gettysburg, this misleading portrayal of Vicksburg’s visitation numbers is of utmost concern. As the Realistic Assessment notes, “people’s wallets usually accompany them.”
Chance’s economic analysis is based on the odd proposition that if it omits spending by existing visitors and residents at the casino in its calculations, then none of Gettysburg’s existing business will be hurt when this money goes elsewhere. As the Realistic Assessment points out, this poses a real and serious adverse impact to the Gettysburg area. In Warren County (Vicksburg), Mississippi, non-manufacturing wage and salary employment fell by several hundred jobs following the opening of its four casinos. Not only did these casinos fail to generate a single net new non-manufacturing wage job outside the gambling establishments themselves, they may have actually destroyed such jobs. Together with the Vicksburg Battlefield’s visitation data, this strongly suggests that tens of millions of dollars of economic activity was transferred and diverted from existing Vicksburg-area businesses to its casinos.
CRIME: Chance also uses Vicksburg for its assertion that the proposed casino would have no adverse social impacts. In reality, the crime rate in Warren County, Mississippi after the introduction of casinos, increased at a far greater rate than it did in Mississippi overall. While Warren County’s crime rate was soaring, the national crime rate was also falling.”
Damage to Existing Businesses: The Chance LIR fails to address the damage the casino will cause to existing businesses by the diversion and transfer of local resident and existing visitor expenditures to the casino. Siegel’s report roughly estimates that about $60 million of spending by existing visitors and residents would be diverted and transferred from existing establishments to the proposed casino. This represents a sizable share of Adams County’s service and retail sector spending.” Consultant Mike Siegel completely refuted Chance’s claim that Vicksburg casinos are good for business. (This testimony is downloadable as “A realistic assessment “ by Mike Siegel.
Press Release 4/3/06 Chance Exchanges $1 million for Borough Support before PGCB
Tonight the Gettysburg Borough Council voted to take a million dollars a year from Chance Enterprises, starting in 2010, if the casino is licensed. The money is payment for supporting the casino during sworn testimony at the PGCB hearing on April 5. They are currently the only government body, in Adams County or anywhere, to support this casino. We have not seen the agreement, nor had many of the Council members who voted. The 6-3 vote bypassed the Council’s usual process of study and review by committees.
Several Council members said that if they did not vote yes, they would not get the money, so obviously they felt the yes testimony is required to get the money.
Susan Star Paddock, chairperson of No Casino Gettysburg, said, “This is a sad day for the Borough and its reputation. 6 of 9 members voted to support the casino before the PGCB so they would get the money offered by Chance. The offer was not a sign of LeVan’s care for the Borough, because if he cared he would have promised the money under any circumstances. Changing the entire identity of our town from a historic national treasure to a casino town will cost far more than the offer the Borough accepted tonight. The casinos arrival in Vickburg dropped Battlefield vistation by 21%, and our heritage tourists have said they won't return if one is built.
The Borough's vote is financially reckless, sacrificing the livelihood of hundreds of people for the paltry sum of $1 million. They never got a financial analysis, and didn't have an inflator on the amount, so by the time the money would come it will be less than $800,000, and as time goes on it becomes a meaningless, tiny number. They not only sold out the community, they did it for pennies on the dollar.
One has to wonder how the PGCB can believe testimony that is bought.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board
P.O. Box 69060
Harrisburg, PA 17106-9060 CONTACT: Nick Hays (717) 346-8321
PA GAMING CONTROL BOARD ADDS
APRIL 7, MAY 17 HEARINGS ON GETTYSBURG-AREA PROPOSAL
HARRISBURG: Because of overwhelming public interest in a gaming facility proposed for Adams County, the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board has added two days of public-input hearings on the application, Anne LaCour Neeb, Executive Director of the PGCB, said today.
These hearings – on Friday April 7, 2006, and Wednesday May 17, 2006 – will be in addition to the April 5, 2006, hearing previously scheduled on this proposal.
“Public input is a critical part of the licensing process, and the Gaming Control Board is committed to ensuring that people across Pennsylvania have an opportunity for their views to become part of the permanent record the Board considers when deciding which proposals are approved for licensure,” Neeb said.
“The Board received timely registrations from almost 1,100 individuals, community organizations, local governments and applicants statewide, including 192 for the Adams County proposal,” she added. “To ensure an opportunity to be heard, we have added three days to the original 13-day schedule.”
The newly scheduled April 7 hearing will take place at the State Museum, on Third and North streets, in Harrisburg. The newly scheduled May 17 hearing will take place at the Gettysburg College Student Union Building in the 200 block of West Lincoln Avenue in Gettysburg.
The newly scheduled hearings will begin promptly at 8:30 a.m. with a video of the presentation that the applicant made at the initial April 5 hearing at the Gettysburg College Student Union Building so those who could not attend the initial hearing may view the presentation before giving their testimony, Neeb said.
Lincoln speaking, Grant/ Lee listen
Rep. Clymer, Grant, Lincoln
historians at the capital
3/16/06
Flash: Senator Punt Opposes Casino, Petitions Press/
The Gettysburg Times reported 3/16/06 that State Senator Terry Punt (R-Adams) stated: …Punt…opposes placing a casino in Adams County. “Even though Dave (LeVan) is a close personal friend of mine this is an issue that he and I are going to have to separate on.” This is the first time Punt has spoken against the casino. LeVan had donated $10,000 to his last Senate campaign. Susan Star Paddock, Chair of the grass roots opposition group, said, “We welcome Senator Punt’s support. It takes courage to tell a friend he has a bad idea, but real friends do that for one another. In stating their opposition, both Sen. Punt and Gov. Rendell are surely Dave's best friends.”
6/06 Punt is NOT supporting Maitlands Bill. He talks about opposing casinos, but doesn't walk the talk. He says the statement he made 3/16 was out of a lack of understanding of Maitland's bill.
3/15/06 PA House Opposes Gettysburg Casino
On 3/14/06 all 199 members of the Pa House of Representatives passed an amendment to Senate Bill 862 that would prohibit a proposed 5000[1] slots casino in Adams County, just one mile from the Gettysburg National Military Park. The amendment was introduced by Representative Stephen Maitland (R-Adams) after a previous legislative attempt got stuck in committee. The bill, which included many other provisions to amend the Commonwealth’s slots law, was later passed 180-20.The Senate can concur in the House amendments and send it to the Governor; amend the bill further and kick it back to the house; just let it sit and wither; or non-concur in House amendments, which would trigger it’s being sent to a conference committee to reconcile the House and Senate versions. After the versions are reconciled, the bill will go to Governor Rendell for signature. No Casino Gettysburg chairperson, Susan Star Paddock, was pleased.
“The unanimous House vote against the Gettysburg casino proves just how unpopular this idea is. We congratulate Steve Maitland for his courage and tenacity in protecting us from this absurd idea, and we are grateful to the entire House of Representatives for standing up for our national heritage. We urge voters to contact their senators and tell them ‘leave the Maitland amendment intact’. Rendell already opposes this casino, so we feel that if it can pass the Senate again he may well sign it.”
[1]According to sworn testimony of Chance Attorney Kathryn Simpson, 1/11/06 before the House committee on Tourism, Chance does intend to start with 3000 slots and build out to 5000 slots. Simpson also stated the casino site is within a mile of “some battlefield” and that Chance shouldn’t be denied its license because of “an accident of geography”.Chance Gaming Operator “Local Casino” Expert. Chance Says Most Gamblers Will be Local. Chance Failed to Give Local Government Access to Traffic Report as Required
Millennium is a company used to building local casinos, casinos that cater to the local area, like their two casinos off the strip in LV. Their expertise fits with Chance's “traffic impact study”, which says the target market is locals within a 60 minute drive. For Chance that is really Carroll County, MD, Adams and Franklin County. The other counties, York, etc, are closer to Grantville.
This morning Chance said their target was 100-150 miles away, but that market is closer to other casinos. This will be a local casino, with a local casino management company, targeting locals.
Said Susan Star Paddock, Chair of the opposition group, “Chance wasn’t able to attract a well known major gaming company because the gaming industry has distanced itself from their nationally condemned proposal. They got a small company that is only willing to operate their casino, not invest in it.
Chance Says Most Gamblers Will be Local
Chance Enterprises “Local Impact Report” does not mention any gamblers coming from the local area, but their own traffic study contradicts that. Through a freedom of information request, the “Traffic Impact Study for Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa, December 2005” was released 3/6/06 by the PGCB to opposition group No Casino Gettysburg. The study contradicts the LIR picture of where the gamblers would come from.
Chance’s “December 2005 Traffic Impact Study” describes their available market as locals. Table 2 of the Trip Generation Calculations from this report describes the Gettysburg’s Service Area, as the 1,135,385 adults living within an hour drive of the proposed casino site. It also states that this market is 49% smaller than Charles Town’s Service Area Population. Although only 1.25 million adults live within an hour of Charles Town, an additional 1.1 million adults live between 60 and 75 minutes of Charles Town bringing the total within 75 minutes to 2.35 million, which is close to the 2,220,397 calculated by Chance.
Service
Area
Population
Difference
in
Population
%
Difference
Factor
of
Safety
Site
Specific
Distance
Site
Specific
Adjustment
Factor
Charles
Town
2,220,397
Gettysburg
1,135,385*
-1,085,012
49%
0.5
-25z5
0.75
*Based on information provided by market study (within a 60 minute service area)[1]
The problem for Chance is that their service area lies between Penn National at Grantville and Charles Town Raceway, both owned by Penn National. They are already disadvantaged within an hour drive. Except for a few adults living west of Franklin, an expansion of Gettysburg’s Service Area to 75 minutes would yield no adults for whom it was not easier to drive to Grantville or Charles Town. If one travels from York, it takes 55 minutes to get to Gettysburg, 50 minutes to Grantville, and 119 minutes to Charles Town. The three main sources of casino patrons will be from Carroll, Franklin and Adams County.
Service Area Populations and Drive Times As is shown in Service Area Populations and Drive Times created by No Casino Gettysburg, even within the defined 60 minute Service Area many of these people will find it easier to drive to Charles Town or Grantville. After subtracting for adults for whom it is a shorter drive to Grantville or Charles Town, there are only 279,000 remaining adults for whom this site is competitively positioned, and they are basically the locals from Adams, Franklin, and Carroll County. Some of the other counties may split their patronage which could increase Gettysburg’s Service Area Population to about 600,000 adults. Not all will go to any casino. This would be a Service Area Population about 28% of Charles Towns.
Charles Town did $355 million in Gambling Revenue in 2004. If the Gettysburg casino performed in a comparable fashion it would produce under $100 million in gambling revenues. According to Chance’s own traffic report this is not a revenue maximizing site for Pennsylvania.
Since they are locals, these “convenience” gamblers will spend little in town. However, the Franklin County patrons will drive to the Casino via Rt. 30 and pass through the square, increasing traffic in town. They will buy gas, but won’t need hotel rooms, food or other services outside the casino. Convenience gamblers don’t generate new jobs outside the casino.
Chance Failed to Give Local Government Access to Traffic Report as Required
On 3/6/06, PGCB Executive Director Anne LaCour Neeb told a contingent from No Casino that the traffic report was received “a couple of days ago” by the PGCB. Paddock said the PGCB spokesperson also reported to them that the analyst receiving the report had been told by Chance Enterprises that the local governments had “lost” or “misplaced” the copy supplied to them.
The regulations for applying for a Category 2 license required this traffic study to be a part of the “Local Impact Report” supplied by the applicant to the host township and County by Dec.21, 2005, seven days before the application deadline of Dec. 28, 2005. The Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa “Local Impact Report” given to the Adams County Commissioners and the Straban Township Supervisors on Dec 21 and dated Dec 20, 2005, did not contain the Traffic Impact Report. Page 4 of the supplied Local Impact Report, under A. Introduction, states that “a Traffic Impact Study…will be provided to you in detail in the next few days.” The County received exactly the same “Local Impact Report” which was opened for inspection in the PGCB offices March 6.
When Chance investor Barbara Ernico was challenged by posters on the No Casino Gettysburg website message board about their “incomplete” application and asked where the traffic study was, and who the gaming operator was, she replied:
Author: Barbara Ernico
Date: 1/31/2006 4:12 pm EDT
"As I said erlier, our application is complete, traffic study and gaming operator included. Your comments are only speculation because the PA Gaming Control Board has not offered anyone the opportunity to see the applications submitted.
Chance has been very open with reporting about our projects. We have also been responsible and report only when we have all the facts and information. The traffic study is being revised because of changes to our project. When it is complete it will be provided to the public. "
Paddock added, “If there are “changes to our project” we would expect that the PGCB, the County and Township would be interested in that data. In any case, the “Traffic Impact Study” which we received from the PGCB, dated Dec 20, does not show any indication that it has been revised. However, the site plan included in the traffic study differs substantially from the plan in the “Local Impact Report”, and is dated earlier than the one included in the Local Impact Report. These different plans have not been given to commissioners or area residents.
“We were told by the County Commissioners in January and again 3/6/06 and 3/7/06 that they did not have a copy of the traffic study, and that they would appreciate if we would bring them the one supplied by the PGCB. We have done so.
At Straban Township on 3/7/06, Code Enforcement Officer Bob Coleman and his secretary both said that they had also never received the Traffic Study.”
“Integrity is a major factor in choosing who will receive a license. We have numerous examples of misrepresentations by Chance Enterprises in their local publicity about this project. This is only one. But looking at just this one small incident, which involves statements to the staff of the PGCB itself, and data that the PGCB has in their own offices, we might wonder about the trustworthiness of this company.”
[1] Traffic Impact Study for CrossRoads Gaming Resort and Spa, December 2005, Grove Miller Engineering.
Press Release 3/8/06
From: No Casino Gettysburg-- a non-profit, grass roots citizen action committee.
Chance Enterprises “Local Impact Report” does not mention any gamblers coming from the local area, but their own traffic study contradicts that. Through a freedom of information request, the “Traffic Impact Study for Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa, December 2005” was released 3/6/06 by the PGCB to opposition group No Casino Gettysburg. The study contradicts the LIR picture of where the gamblers would come from.
Chance’s “December 2005 Traffic Impact Study” describes their available market as locals. Table 2 of the Trip Generation Calculations from this report describes the Gettysburg’s Service Area, as the 1,135,385 adults living within an hour drive of the proposed casino site. It also states that this market is 49% smaller than Charles Town’s Service Area Population. Although only 1.25 million adults live within an hour of Charles Town, an additional 1.1 million adults live between 60 and 75 minutes of Charles Town bringing the total within 75 minutes to 2.35 million, which is close to the 2,220,397 calculated by Chance.
Table 2. Gettysburg Service Area Adjustments
Service
Area
Population
Difference
in
Population
%
Difference
Factor
of
Safety
Site
Specific
Distance
Site
Specific
Adjustment
Factor
Charles
Town
2,220,397
Gettysburg
1,135,385*
-1,085,012
49%
0.5
-25z5
0.75
*Based on information provided by market study (within a 60 minute service area)[1]The problem for Chance is that their service area lies between Penn National at Grantville and Charles Town Raceway, both owned by Penn National. They are already disadvantaged within an hour drive. Except for a few adults living west of Franklin, an expansion of Gettysburg’s Service Area to 75 minutes would yield no adults for whom it was not easier to drive to Grantville or Charles Town.
Proceeding from data offered in the Traffic Report, No Casino created the following chart of drive times within the Service Area Population. The lowest drive times between destinations are in the boxes. For example, on the top line, if one travels from York, it takes 55 minutes to get to Gettysburg, 50 minutes to Grantville, and 119 minutes to Charles Town. The three main sources of casino patrons will be from Carroll, Franklin and Adams County.
Service Area Populations and Drive Times
As is shown in Service Area Populations and Drive Times created by No Casino Gettysburg, even within the defined 60 minute Service Area many of these people will find it easier to drive to Charles Town or Grantville. After subtracting for adults for whom it is a shorter drive to Grantville or Charles Town, there are only 279,000 remaining adults for whom this site is competitively positioned, and they are basically the locals from Adams, Franklin, and Carroll County. Some of the other counties may split their patronage which could increase Gettysburg’s Service Area Population to about 600,000 adults. Not all will go to any casino. This would be a Service Area Population about 28% of Charles Towns.
Charles Town did $355 million in Gambling Revenue in 2004. If the Gettysburg casino performed in a comparable fashion it would produce under $100 million in gambling revenues. According to Chance’s own traffic report this is not a revenue maximizing site for Pennsylvania.
Since they are locals, these “convenience” gamblers will spend little in town. However, the Franklin County patrons will drive to the Casino via Rt. 30 and pass through the square, increasing traffic in town. They will buy gas, but won’t need hotel rooms, food or other services outside the casino. Convenience gamblers don’t generate new jobs outside the casino. Chance Failed to Give Local Government Access to Traffic Report as Required
On 3/6/06, PGCB Executive Director Anne LaCour Neeb told a contingent from No Casino that the traffic report was received “a couple of days ago” by the PGCB. Paddock said the PGCB spokesperson also reported to them that the analyst receiving the report had been told by Chance Enterprises that the local governments had “lost” or “misplaced” the copy supplied to them.
The regulations for applying for a Category 2 license required this traffic study to be a part of the “Local Impact Report” supplied by the applicant to the host township and County by Dec.21, 2005, seven days before the application deadline of Dec. 28, 2005. The Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa “Local Impact Report” given to the Adams County Commissioners and the Straban Township Supervisors on Dec 21 and dated Dec 20, 2005, did not contain the Traffic Impact Report. Page 4 of the supplied Local Impact Report, under A. Introduction, states that “a Traffic Impact Study…will be provided to you in detail in the next few days.” The County received exactly the same “Local Impact Report” which was opened for inspection in the PGCB offices March 6.
When Chance investor Barbara Ernico was challenged by posters on the No Casino Gettysburg website message board about their “incomplete” application and asked where the traffic study was, and who the gaming operator was, she replied:
Author: Barbara Ernico Date: 1/31/2006 4:12 pm EDT
"As I said erlier, our application is complete, traffic study and gaming operator included. Your comments are only speculation because the PA Gaming Control Board has not offered anyone the opportunity to see the applications submitted.
Chance has been very open with reporting about our projects. We have also been responsible and report only when we have all the facts and information. The traffic study is being revised because of changes to our project. When it is complete it will be provided to the public. "
Paddock added, “If there are “changes to our project” we would expect that the PGCB, the County and Township would be interested in that data. In any case, the “Traffic Impact Study” which we received from the PGCB, dated Dec 20, does not show any indication that it has been revised. However, the site plan included in the traffic study differs substantially from the plan in the “Local Impact Report”, and is dated earlier than the one included in the Local Impact Report. These different plans have not been given to commissioners or area residents.
“We were told by the County Commissioners in January and again 3/6/06 and 3/7/06 that they did not have a copy of the traffic study, and that they would appreciate if we would bring them the one supplied by the PGCB. We have done so.
At Straban Township on 3/7/06, Code Enforcement Officer Bob Coleman and his secretary both said that they had also never received the Traffic Study.”
“Integrity is a major factor in choosing who will receive a license. We have numerous examples of misrepresentations by Chance Enterprises in their local publicity about this project. This is only one. But looking at just this one small incident, which involves statements to the staff of the PGCB itself, and data that the PGCB has in their own offices, we might wonder about the trustworthiness of this company.”
[1] Traffic Impact Study for CrossRoads Gaming Resort and Spa, December 2005, Grove Miller Engineering.
____________________________________________
Gettysburg Casino Jobs Prospects Fall Short, 2/12/06
1. Chance Enterprises Labor Agreement Shuts Out Local Contractors The Labor agreement signed by Chance Enterprises with the “Building and Construction Trades” council will lock out all local contractors and construction workers, according to Hank Butler, Director of Government Affairs of Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC). ABC is a national organization dedicated to merit-based hiring in the U.S. construction industry. Butler explained the problem during a public meeting of No Casino Gettysburg on 2/11/05. Butler said that Chance Enterprises Protected Labor Agreement for union labor construction cuts out ALL Adams County, and most Central PA construction companies. These companies are technically able to bid on the project, but couldn't use any of their local crews. There are NO union shops in Adams County. Chance has promised local jobs during construction, but this agreement with the Building Trades is an abandonment of that promise, since the construction workers will have to come from Baltimore, Philly to Pittsburgh, where there are union workers.
No Casino Gettysburg takes NO stand for or against unions. Our position on this issue is that the PLA signed by Chance is anti-community.
For more information, please contact Hank Butler. Hank Butler,Associated Builder Contractors, www.abc.org, 717-653-8106
2. Post Construction Jobs Mostly Part Time.
No Casino Gettysburg volunteer Keith Miller has reported that, post construction, the job situation is only slightly better. In his 77 page, “Cost-Benefit Analysis of Casino Gambling in Adams County, 2nd edition”, Miller says that
Chance will offer 1,429 jobs, 71% of them part time, but they will pay slightly more than other local hospitality jobs. The top five executives will earn 2 million, average for the industry. According to a radio interview given by David LeVan, CEO of Chance Enterprises, the top 100-200 jobs will go to skilled workers from the out of town casino company hired to run the casino. The average local can still get a part time job paying about $11,000 a year.
Miller pointed out that with almost full unemployment in the area, (unemployment is just 3.2- 3.4%, one of the lowest rates in the U.S. and the average wage is over $29,500) few residents, beyond students, will want these part-time, low wage jobs. Time to interview Mr. Miller is available Tues, Wed, Thurs this week in Gettysburg. The full cost benefit analysis can be downloaded from www.nocasinogettysburg.com
3. No Casino Presents to Adams County Planning Commission Wed. 7PM, Ag Center, 670 Old Harrisburg Rd. For people who missed Saturday's No Casino Gettysburg meeting at the Seminary, there is another chance to hear Keith Miller's Cost/ Benefit Analysis of Casino Gambling in Adams County this Wed, Feb 15, 7PM at the Ag Center, lower floor, when the casino opposition group will present to the regular monthly meeting of the Adams County Planning Commission. This is a public meeting.
No Casino Gettysburg Calls Chance’s Proposal “Incomplete”
PGCB Actions “Catch 22”, Public Meeting to Mobilize 2/11
On 2/2/06, three of the applicants for stand alone slots were rejected by the PGCB for incomplete applications. In Response, No Casino Gettysburg suggests that the same may happen to the Chance Enterprises proposal.
1. They were required* to submit a complete “Local Impact Report” (LIR) to the County and Straban Township 7 days before submitting their application, or Dec. 21, 2005. Their submitted Impact Report is missing the required Traffic Impact Report, which their LIR promises on p. 4 will be given to the county in “the next few days.” As of 1/30/06, the Commissioners had not yet received this report, so Chance has not complied with PGCB regulations.
The summary of the missing traffic study in the Chance LIR suggests that traffic at Rts. 15 and 30 will be at “level of service D or better”. (p5) LOS D is equivalent to DC traffic at rush hour. Roads are arteries, and a clot at this intersection will give the rest of the Adams County road system a stroke. On the NoCasinoGettysburg.com message board, investor Barbara Ernico of Camp Hill posted that
Author: Barbara Ernico
Date: 1/30/2006 4:31 pm EDT
“Chance Enterprises considers its application to the PA Gaming Control Board to be complete. All applications, however, will be reviewed by the Board to determine if they require additional information or clarification. Their process allows a period of time to all applicants to submit that information and thereby, complete their application.”
In other words, they are under a grace period.
Author: Barbara Ernico
Date: 1/31/2006 4:12 pm EDT
“As I said earlier, our application is complete, traffic study and gaming operator included. Your comments are only speculation because the PA Gaming Control Board has not offered anyone the opportunity to see the applications submitted.
Chance has been very open with reporting about our projects. We have also been responsible and report only when we have all the facts and information. The traffic study is being revised because of changes to our project. When it is complete it will be provided to the public.”
If there are major changes to the project then Chance is even more obligated to provide the community with those changes, and the Local Impact Report filed with the County is no longer valid. So far they have announced nothing new except a financial partner.We do not believe the application can be considered complete until they have submitted a copy of this study with the PGCB, and the County and Township, or until they have filed a corrected/revised study if they now contend their project has changed substantially.
In addition, any change in the project that would effect the traffic forecast would likely also affect the economic analysis part of their LIR since they both drive off of the assumed level (and to some extent the mode) of visitation.
2. Chance is required to have a gaming operator, a casino company. They’ve been trying for ten months to attract one, but the casino industry itself seems to have distanced itself. If they do have an operator or partner, as is suggested by Ernico’s post, why not announce it? If they do not have such a partner, then they have an incomplete application under PGCB guidelines, and should be rejected. 3. Contrary to Freedom of Information Act and Right to Know laws, the PGCB has chosen to release no data from this or other applications, and Chance itself won’t release the data it claims to have. The PGCB will hold public hearings in Gettysburg about this casino April 5, with registration required for testimony by March 6. The PGCB wrote to No Casino Gettysburg saying they would not be given a written response to their request for information until March 6. “This is Catch 22. We need information about the proposal in order to testify, but we can’t learn if we can get that info until the day the testimony must be submitted to the Board in order to testify. If neither party (Chance or PGCB) releases this vital information, if it does indeed exist, then the populace is being asked to testify without access to the full complement of information.” We hope the PGCB will look at more than finances in rejecting applicants, and consider the incomplete application filed by Chance Enterprises as reason for dismissal of their application. *Relevant Laws: One of the required components of a slot machine license application is a
“Local Impact Report”. The PA Gaming Control Board Regulations define, “A
local impact report, which includes but is not limited to; engineering
reports and traffic studies, including details of any adverse impact on
transportation, transit access, housing, water and sewer systems, local
police and emergency service capabilities, existing tourism, including
historical and cultural resources or other municipal service or resource...”
[§ 441.4 (a) (21)]
Those regulations also state that, “...A copy of the local impact report
required under § 441.4(a) (21) shall be provided to each political
subdivision in which the licensed facility will be located at least 7 days
prior to the filing of the application for a slot machine license. The
applicant shall file a proof of service to the Board...” [§ 441.3 (c)]
Tom Weaver Threatens Lawsuit over No Casino Remarks 1/26/06
When Tom Weaver didn’t attend the 1/10/06 public meeting arranged by the Adams County Commissioners to hear No Casino Gettysburg’s experts, Susan Star Paddock was quoted in a local newspaper, The Evening Sun,(1/11/06) saying that Weaver had been “bought and sold”.
On 1/25/06 Mrs. Paddock received a certified letter from Samuel Gates, Esq. representing Weaver, which calls Paddock’s quoted remarks “slander per se!”, demands a public apology and suggests that Weaver will “pursue his remedies at law against both you individually and in your capacity as Chairwoman of No Casino Gettysburg.”
Paddock laughed at what she calls “an over-reaction” and clarified, “I wasn’t implying any financial dealings. I meant that he has bought Chance’s propaganda and, by failing to do due diligence, he has sold out the County.”
Her remarks were a response to Weaver’s claim, as reported, that the standing room only public meeting violated the Sunshine law, while the private meeting with Chance Enterprises was a legal meeting in which he was listening to his constituents. He is also quoted as saying that he did not need to hear No Casino Gettysburg’s experts, even though, she noted, “Chance attorneys John White and Jeff Ernico did attend.”
According to Paddock, Weaver could not have known what the experts, one paid and one volunteer, would say, because they hadn’t provided the report before the meeting. Paddock also predicted Weaver’s political defeat by referring to an independent Susquehanna Polling and Research poll of July, 2005, that found 54% Adams County Voters opposed the casino, with only 31% in favor. “That’s not enough voters to re-elect Weaver,” said Paddock. “As the governor’s office told us months ago, so few people want this casino, any politician who supports it is committing political suicide.”
The Commissioners meeting heard No Casino experts argue that the costs to Adams County of the casino would outweigh the benefits 10:1. The impact includes daily traffic jams, 25% less heritage tourism, lost business in Gettysburg from diverted and abused funds, and high social costs from the locals who would become addicted to the slot machines. No Casino Gettysburg will present their reports in an interactive public meeting Sat. Feb 11 at the Lutheran Theological Seminary Chapel from 8:30-12.
Paddock added, “We invited Chance Enterprises to participate in the meeting, or in any public debate, at any time, but Jeff Ernico (Chance attorney and investor’s husband) told me that they considered public meetings “a sideshow” and would not debate us or appear with us unless required to do so by an “appropriate governmental authority”. I guess Chance Enterprises and Weaver both want to stay arms length away from the public.”
All documents presented to the Commissioners are available for download on the nocasinogettysburg.com website, including Chance’s own “Local Impact Report”. Paddock explained, “Since they won’t meet, we decided to have a “virtual debate” online.”
Casino Developers Refuse Public Meeting/ Debate; Virtual Debate on NCG Website
After the hearings before the Committee on Tourism for the Maitland Bill, No Casino Gettysburg Chairperson Susan Star Paddock introduced herself to Chance Attorney Kathryn Lease, and asked if Chance would participate in a public debate with No Casino, or if not a debate, appear at the same meeting to give a presentation. Paddock reports, “I told her about our planned meeting Feb 11 at the Seminary from 9-12, and said that might be a good forum. She said she'd ask about it. Then I saw an opportunity to talk with Chance attorney Jeff Ernico, husband of investor Barbara Lease, and a third Chance attorney, Robin Ross of Greenlee Partners of Philadelphia.
I asked Jeff the same thing I asked Lease, but he clearly doesn't need to check with anyone before answering. He seemed angry that I asked and said NO! He said they would only appear with us when invited by an "appropriate government authority" and would not participate "in a sideshow".
I asked him directly because over the last months several people have approached me with the idea of organizing a public forum for the two sides. We always say yes; Chance always says no. They will not meet the public. Even their first press conference was invitation only, and according to Mark Berg, it was the Chance Attorney Jeff Ernico who ejected him from that meeting at the Gettysburg Hotel before it began. This attitude makes their claim of caring about the people of Adams County questionable at best. I believe that listening to people is a basic way of establishing a relationship of mutual care.
I guess the "appropriate government authority" would be the PGCB's public hearings to be held in our County sometime in the future. We'll be there.”
On the home page of Nocasinogettysburg.com we have posted Chance's "Local Impact Report
Mike Siegel's preliminary notes on what is missing from the report
Keith Miller's FACTS report on social impact costs of the casino
AND
Chance's Answers to Miller and Siegel with Miller's answers to Chance's comments.
This is a virtual debate, since Chance Enterprises has refused to debate or even to appear in public with No Casino unless required by an "appropriate governmental authority."
So the virtual debate continues!
Public Seminar and Citizen Mobilization Conference 9-12, Saturday Feb 11, Lutheran Theological Seminary. You’ll get ALL the facts and Figure out how YOU, whoever you are, can help.
#############################
1/10/06 Public Presentation to the Commissioners:
Thanks to everyone who sent in donations to make our presentation to the commissioners successful. The room was an overflow crowd and about 30 people could not get in. The Commissioners had set the date and time and place, and refused to offer a larger room. The room was under construction and only about 30 chairs were available. Many people stood through the entire meeting. Chance attorneys Jeff Ernico and John White did attend, stood, and took careful notes. Two posters on the message board, Bob and Sharon Walters, came in “Go Casino” t-shirts. There was good local news coverage.
Commissioners Lucy Lott and Glenn Snyder attended. Tom Weaver did not, saying he didn’t need to listen to our “propaganda” since he knew what we would say, and he is for the casino. Susan Paddock told a reporter later that he was “bought and sold”, and he threatened to sue. I amended the statement to say he had “bought Chance’s report and sold out the County.” I also said his pro-casino stance would cost him the next election, since the Susquehanna Polling and Research poll last July found the majority of Adams County voters are AGAINST the casino.
Jim Paddock presented a map we obtained from the County revealing that the site is exactly 1 mile from East Cavalry Field, and 1.46 miles from the rest of the battlefield.
Keith Miller, Civil War author and business consultant, and NCG volunteer, presented a report that shows that the Casino costs will be 10x the income to the County. That full report is downloadable on the www.nocasinogettysburg.com website on “The Investors” Page. Miller’s report on the devastating social impacts for Adams County was done in consultation with two national experts, economist Earl Grinols, author of “Gambling in America: Costs and Benefits”, and psychologist Robert Breen, Gambling Addiction expert. Rhode Island Hospital Gambling Treatment Program.
The main presentation will be by Michael Siegel of Public and Environmental Finance Consultants in Washington, DC. Mr. Siegel presented a preliminary report on fiscal impact of the Gettysburg casino, identifying the weaknesses in the Chance report.
“Mr. Siegel hasn’t had time to do a complete analysis, said Paddock, but his report showed that this casino is not competitive, so would not benefit the state. His preliminary evaluation of the weaknesses in the Chance report is downloadable as a PDF file on “the investors” page of www.nocasinogettysbutrg.com. Incidentally, the entire Chance Enterprises Local Impact Report is available on our website as well.
1/11/06 Highlights of Hearings on House Bill 2264 1/11/06 Quite a few No Casino Gettysburg supporters attended this hearing. Four of us testified for No Casino Gettysburg on the Bill that would keep a casino 15 miles from the Gettysburg National Military Park: Susan Star Paddock, Chair No Casino Gettysburg
Larry Clowers, Director of Civil War Studies, American Museum of Military History
Mary Goundrey, Civil War Preservation Trust
Keith Miller, MBA, Civil War Author and Business Consultant
We enjoyed testifying in the legislature, and we made an excellent case that Heritage Tourism, a mainstay of our economy and a benefit to the state as a whole, would be harmed by the introduction of a casino near Gettysburg. Heritage Tourism is down 25% in Harpers Ferry (Charles Town is 6 miles away) and Vicksburg, based on NPS data. Tourists stay away because they don’t want to battle casino traffic to get to the Battlefields, and because the casino changes the town’s character.
I don’t yet have the transcript from the hearing so all quotes are approximate.
At the hearing before the House Committee on Tourism, Chance attorney Kathryn Lease Simpson says Chance should not be penalized from putting a casino exactly 1 mile from East Cavalry field because of “an accident of geography”. She says Chance’s claim that their facility was “nearly 3 miles from the battlefield” came from a road sign on Rt. 15/30. She said there is no good road from E. Cavalry Field to the site, forgetting
Cavalry Field Road
where Battlefield Harley sits. She suggested that almost no one visits East Cavalry Field anyway. She says they do intend to install the maximum number of slot machines, 5000, in stages, starting with 3000. She repeated the claim made in Chance’s Local Impact Report that visitation in Vicksburg was up, in an attempt to refute our claim that the casinos had harmed heritage tourism there and it was down. On of the Committee members, Rep. Boyd, asked her if she had any figures to back that up, since our claim that it had fallen since casinos came in was based on figures from the National Park Service. She had no figures to back up her claims. In general her testimony was extremely weak. The Committee members expressed concern that the bill would open the legislature to lawsuits and Chairman Godshall said it would cut out other applicants like all but one of the Philadelphia City applicants, an applicant near Ft. Necessity near Pittsburgh, and an applicant 10 miles from Valley Forge. The bill is flawed, but I challenged the legislators to re-draft it. I said we are the amateurs; they have the means to draft a bill that would pass the legislature and save Gettysburg.
Maitland, Steve Nickol and Mechanicsburg Rep Jerry Nailor, all suggested re-drafting the legislation to apply only to Adams. Nailor suggested putting in a provision to provide compensation to the investors who applied in good faith. I guess that would be the State compensating them. Nailor seemed to think that such a bill would pass.
We are certainly willing to go forward, even though the compensation part galls me. I believe the bill, if passed, could let Chance depart happy because they have a big chunk of money in compensation and perhaps are thus better off than if we let it go to the PGCB, who will reject it and then they get nothing.
The advantage of the bill for us is that it protects Gettysburg in the future from casino speculation. So everybody wins. I met with Steve Maitland 1/13 and he said the legislators will amend the bill, because the sense of the legislature is they do want to protect Gettysburg.
County Commissioners, Chamber, Public to Hear No Casino Gettysburg
1/6/06
Chance Enterprises had time to present their “local impact report” to the County Commissioners, and now the opposition group, No Casino Gettysburg,
has requested time to present their response. The public is invited to the meeting, which will be held Tuesday, January 10, 2006, at 1:30 pm in the Adams County Courthouse, 2nd floor Commissioners Hearing Room.
The Chance “local impact report” presented on December 20 in private meetings with the Chamber of Commerce and Commissioners, said there were no social ills associated with the proposed slots casino, and therefore no costs to the County. Susan Star Paddock, No Casino Gettysburg Chairman, said, “We want the public to have all the facts, so we’ve posted Chance’s unabridged local impact report on our website.”
The Commissioners are interested in listening to both sides of the slots issue as it relates to Gettysburg and Adams County. Commissioner Glenn Snyder said, “We are interested in addressing the uncertainty of the funding which would come to the County, and how much the casino would cost the County.”
The Chamber of Commerce President Peg Weaver said she would invite their Board members to attend.
Susan Star Paddock, No Casino Gettysburg Chairman, said, “We will present solid data to counter the unrealistic picture painted by Chance Enterprises.”
The presentation will open with a report on social impacts developed by strategic planning consultant Keith Miller, MBA, in consultation with two national experts, economist Earl Grinols, author of “Gambling in America: Costs and Benefits”, and psychologist Robert Breen, Gambling Addiction expert. Rhode Island Hospital Gambling Treatment Program.
The main presentation will be by Michael Siegel of Public and Environmental Finance Consultants in Washington, DC. Mr. Siegel will present a preliminary report on fiscal impact of the Gettysburg casino, as well as identify the weaknesses in the Chance report.
“Mr. Siegel hasn’t had time to do a complete analysis, said Paddock, “but we are eager for people to hear his preliminary findings.”
Opposition Posts Chance Enterprises Local Impact Report
12/26/05
Chance Enterprises Local Impact Report has been publicly posted first on the opposition website, www.nocasinogettysburg.com. The report is available by link from “The Investors” page of the No Casino Gettysburg website.
Casino investors must submit their complete application to the Pa. Gaming Control Board by Wed, Dec 28, 2005. In compliance with the law, they submitted a 77 page Local Impact Report to the County Commissioners on Dec. 21st, the last minute allowed. Although the first and second Chance Enterprises websites have promised that the report would be posted there, those sites have not made the report public.
Asked why No Casino Gettysburg would post the Chance material, which describes what one newspaper called “a rosy picture” of the casino’s impact, chairperson Susan Star Paddock replied, “We want the public to have as much information as possible. We want our site to be one stop shopping for ALL the facts, so anyone can download their unabridged report from our site. When our economists and researchers complete their analysis of the Chance report, we’ll post that as well. And since Chance has not been willing to debate us in public, this allows an electronic debate. People can also comment on this Chance sales document on our message board, a privilege the Chance website does not offer to the public.”
No Casino Gettysburg will respond to the chance report during a public and open meeting with the Adams County Commissioners on January 10 at 1:30.
12/8/05
Chance Changes Name of Gettysburg Casino.
Giving in to one of three demands made by an opposition group, Chance Enterprises has changed the name of their proposed Gettysburg casino to Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa. The opposition group had demanded that there be no casino in Gettysburg, no casino in Adams County, and “no casino anywhere exploiting the name Gettysburg”. The Gettysburg Times reported that during a private meeting, a member of the Chamber of Commerce had suggested to Chance CEO, David LeVan that the name Gettysburg Gaming Resort and Spa was unacceptable. LeVan later told a TV reporter on Channel 21 WHP that the name had become “a distraction”. Susan Star Paddock, Chair of the opposition group No Casino Gettysburg, said, “We are grateful that Chance has changed the name, but we wonder how they will describe its location—surely they’ll say, Crossroads…at Gettysburg.” She continued, “ The next step is to change the location outside the County. The casino is located at the corner of Rt. 15 and 30, in Gettysburg’s Straban Township, and is one mile from the Gettysburg National Military Park. This business is incompatible with our community identity as a family friendly heritage tourist destination. Gettysburg is the most beloved small town in America, where the decisive Battle of Gettysburg determined that we would be one nation, free of slavery. It is near ground hallowed by the sacrifice of thousands, the site of the most famous speech in the world, and the home of WWII hero and American President Dwight D. Eisenhower. This town is a national treasure, visited by nearly 2 million heritage tourists a year.” Various polls have found that the casino is opposed by 54% of Adams County voters (Susquehanna Polling and Research, 7/05), 64% of PA voters, 78% of Central PA voters, (Mason Dixon Polling 10/05) and 96% of heritage tourists.(poll by No Casino Gettysburg, 7/05) Statements against it were made by Governor Rendell, Senators Santorum and Specter, Congressman Platts, Representatives Maitland and Nickol, 4 major national historic preservation groups, and 43,000 people who have signed the petition against it. On Dec 1st a private meeting between Straban Township supervisors and Chance was cancelled after concerned Citizens of Straban protested that the meeting was subject to the Sunshine law. The Adams County Commissioners held a similar “open but not public” meeting, but allowed one citizen to attend. Although they stated during the County meeting that they did not know when they would release their economic data to the public, they did call a last minute press conference that afternoon. No Casino Gettysburg considered this another victory.
What happened Thursday, Dec 1 in Gettysburg
Originally Chance brought their dog-and-pony show to town for three scheduled private meetings, one with the County Commissioners, one with the Chamber, and the third with the Straban supervisors.
The Concerned Citizens of Straban Township sent a letter from thei
