Request For More Slots Going to Public Hearing

Thursday, June 28, 2007 09:55 PM

The Treasure Cove Casino and Hotel at the corner of Highways 97 and 16

By a vote of 6-2, Prince George City Council has given first two readings to a rezoning application that, if approved, would allow the Treasure Cove Casino to increase its slot machines from the current 400 to 575, in total.

When questioned by Councillor Brian Skakun, the City’s Director of Corporate Services, Kathleen Soltis, says the additional machines would translate into an extra $1-million dollars in gaming revenue for the city - confirming Skakun’s calculation Treasure Cove expects a $10-million dollar increase in revenues, as the city’s share is 10-percent.

Both Councillors Skakun and Debora Munoz voted against allowing the application to go to a public hearing. In fact, Munoz had put forward a motion to defer the matter to a later date to allow councillors more time to research the implications of the request and to allow the city to consult with the public, as, she felt, was required by the city’s 2003 gaming policy. However, city staff pointed out the policy Munoz was referring to was repealed and replaced in the fall of 2006. Mayor Colin Kinsley says, since then, any change in the number of gaming machines requires a public hearing and that’s what this process is about.

Kinsley says, despite the hard work of staff, this application failed to make it onto Monday night’s council agenda, but the public hearing is scheduled for July 9th, so 1st and 2nd reading were scheduled for tonight - coinciding with a Special Meeting to adopt the 2006 Municipal Report - to meet the legal requirement of 10-days between 1st and 2nd reading and the public hearing.

Munoz’s deferral motion failed and the majority of councillors voted in favour of allowing the application to proceed to a public hearing at council’s July 9th meeting.

Councillor Glen Scott says he attended a public meeting hosted by the applicant at Treasure Cove on June 7th to discuss the application and Scott says owner John Major and engineer Dave McWalter thoroughly answered questions from those living nearby.

Councillor Don Zurowski says he has some concerns about the social impacts, but supports going to a public hearing. He says he’ll be looking for additional information from city staff at that time on how Prince George compares to its peer communities on the number of slot machines per capita now, and that figure, should the increase be approved.

Councillor Murry Krause says he’s hopeful that those with expertise on the social issues surrounding gaming will come out to the public hearing. He admits this is an emotional issue, but would like to base his final decision on factual expertise.

Mayor Kinsley says he’s spoken at length with residents of the community and says Treasure Cove is viewed as "almost a regional tourism attraction". He says while he hasn’t seen the hard numbers, he’s heard anecdotally that the occupancy rate of the on-site hotel is extremely high. "So the greater community has talked about this particular success, so I think we need to hear from them, as well, in the hearing."

Owner John Major, who sat quietly in the gallery during tonight’s meeting, says it’s expected 80- to 90-percent of the revenue coming in to the casino will be from out-of-town visitors if the expansion is approved. Major says he’s pleased the rezoning application will go to a public hearing.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 09:55 PM in News by Michelle Cyr-Whiting

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on June 28 2007 10:33 PM

Can't believe now good the administration is at handling the councilors.

What's so important about slot machines that it has to get rushed through tonight. Nothing really, but it sure is effective in keeping the councilors off balance.

Like, "Oh, it must be important if administration has made the extra effort and done the work to bring this vital request to us honourable councilors for our sober consideration and deliberation. We mustn't hold it up!" HeeHee! If administration says it's OK, it must be OK. Next.

Posted by: owl on June 29 2007 1:12 AM

�80- to 90-percent of the revenue coming in to the casino is from out-of-town visitors�

Unbelievable! Are people in PG really that smart compared to people from the catchment region and tourists passing through the City?

Or is he just saying that so that it is easier for Council to grab onto another $million since only 20% comes from local taxpayers?

I would like to have that verified by an independent audit before it becomes part of the decision making process.

Posted by: whynotyou on June 29 2007 7:26 AM

So, how do they tell what percentage is local and what is from "out of town"......I have never been to the new casino, do they ask people to register at the door? Do they check for ID?

Regardless, it's a smoke screen. They want us to think they are looking out for the morality of the locals. So it's okay if the out of towners spend their money and starve their kids so long as it is not the locals doing it? How considerate of our "administration" to confer this prior to pushing through the application.

Well, we all know it will come to pass, by hook or by crook. Not that it matters much, IMO all adults should be capable of making their own decisions and living by them. So, maybe our taxes will go down next year? Maybe in six years the bridge will be paid for?? I'd like to know what they plan to do with the loot!!

Posted by: owl on June 29 2007 8:11 AM

They have cameras throughout the casino and they hire local people who can spot an out of towner a mile away. Once that information is put inot a facial regonition program, the computers hooked up to the monitors will be able to do the work automatically.

Couple that with an electronic report of how much the machine was taking in during the time the person was sitting there and you get a pretty accurate picture.

Technology is such a wonderful thing.

;-)

Of course, some still rely on the old objective survey trick.

Posted by: diplomat on June 29 2007 8:20 AM

There are many ways to determine whether patrons of the hotel/casino are locals or out-of-town visitors. People sign in at the hotel and cars have license plates, for instance.

Mr. Major seems to be a serious business man and if he states that 80 to 90% are not from P.G. his numbers can probably be backed up by solid evidence.

The morality of casinos was discussed by City Council some decade or more ago when it sent a letter to Victoria objecting to the installation of hundreds of slots when the casino was first being built on George Street.

City Council's concerns were overruled by the then NDP government.

The horses are gone and the barn doors have been closed a long time ago on the gambling issue.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on June 29 2007 8:37 AM

The 80% out of town figure can't be right. Something is fishy. The numbers are more likely in line with other entertainment venues, like the swimming pool.

Maybe somone got the numbers on the casino dollars and hotel dollars mixed up?

The extra 175 slots will be so us locals can play also.. HeeHee! The foreigner have taken up all the good slot machines, BooHoo!

Posted by: REALIST on June 29 2007 9:06 AM

I do not care where the gambling victims come from they are all victims of government greed. We are now addicted to funding through a vice and nothing will ever make that right even if they do say the victims come from out of town. Wrong is wrong.

Posted by: owl on June 29 2007 9:48 AM

I did not watch Council last night. Someone just told me that George Paul was the agent for the Casino making the presentation.

I think that there should be a stipulation that government officials who have key positions such as City Managers should not be able to work in areas which allow "insider knowledge" to be transferred to outside companies, organizations, etc. for a period of at least 2 years after they have left the position.

Posted by: owl on June 29 2007 10:13 AM

http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/features/saskgaming/news/story.html?id=e176b9d4-ec68-4215-ad27-e5848b8c2351&k=83104

A recent article about the Saskatchewan casino scene. The two casinos are about an hour or less apart, I believe. Note that the out of town attendance in Regina is about 20%. Also note the importance of providing a more rounded service - show lounge, food, etc.

Our Casino was based on the show lounge being included. It makes it a more rounded entertainment centre. If they want more slots, it should come with the requirement to keep the show lounge and operate it to a higher success rate than presently rather than simply giving up.

The City should be looking at alternate proposals for increasing slots. That alternate should not include removing an existing show lounge capacity.

Posted by: seamutt on June 29 2007 10:48 AM

I find it interesting that what ever the Casino wants it seems to get. In the area of the Great Wall restuarant the businesses there wanted a left turn lane off of highway 97 for traffic going south. They where told no, that it was too dangerous. Along comes the Casino and well look for yourself, access no problem.
Now here comes the new gaming centre downtown and they will need parking. All of a sudden the city says we need more parking downtown and lets build it under the new gaming centre. How convienent the gaming centre gets its parking paid for by the taxpayer. Also who needs more parking for a downtown that is dying!
Now last night we have a city council meeting and it seems the most important issue on the agenda is more slot machines and this is pushed in a rush.
Now lets see, access for the Casino, no problem. Parking for the gaming centre, no problem. More slots, no problem. New bridge across the Nechako, major problem.
Hey maybe the new gaming centre should have been built across on the north side of the Nechako river and we would have had a new bridge, no problem.

Posted by: owl on June 29 2007 10:51 AM

http://www.langleyadvance.com/features/edm/09edm.pdf

from the above link:

�The attached Coast Hotel and Convention Centre provides 77 hotel rooms and convention space for up to 1,000 people. Marketing manager Joel McLean, of Gateway Casinos, owner of Langley�s Cascades Casino, said it is the facility�s diversity that has made it a popular destination for many people.�

So, that is the case in Langley, the case in Regina and Moose Jaw, and probably a bunch of others. I know that competition in the Ottawa area is providing some benefits to the community in providing increased services and reduced cost of services. How much of an effort did Major put into trying to run a show lounge?

Anyone can put slots out in the middle of the streets and people will flock to them. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out how to make money with those machines if the red carpet is always rolled out for you.

These machines are a drawing card which can attract other businesses. In businesses, such as wood manufacturing, it is called value added.

Compare gaming as the service at a primary level, similar to primary manufacturing of products. It draws a crowd. Add value � look at Las Vegas to see the ultimate addition of value to the primary draw of gaming � and you got yourself a growth industry which can generate show lounges, hotel rooms, convention facilities restaurants, spas, hall of fame museums, retail, wedding chapels �.. whatever suits your fancy.

Major is proposing to go the other way. That is not in the interest of this City�s future as far as I am concerned.

Posted by: RRrabbitt on June 29 2007 10:51 AM

I know this is terrible.... and I really must do something about my dyslexia... but I really did think that the headline read: ..

"Request for More Sluts Going to Public Hearing"...

I thought that was kind of an odd request for a public hearing... but then I guess you can have a public hearing about anything these days...

Sorry, my bad... :-)

Posted by: owl on June 29 2007 10:55 AM

"Hey maybe the new gaming centre should have been built across on the north side of the Nechako river"

While I realize that was meant as a tongue in cheek remark, it is that type of destination facility which would start opening up the riverfront for more people-oriented uses rather than industry uses.

Where are the City Planners? Hello, anyone home??

Posted by: owl on June 29 2007 10:56 AM

Was that public or pubic?

Posted by: Gofaster on June 29 2007 11:38 AM

council once again caving into MR MAJOR...
like to know what he has on everyone?

Posted by: Winged1 on June 29 2007 3:07 PM

Just what we need more Gambling to go with more liquor stores open later. The only acceptable vices are the ones the goverment can over tax you on.

Posted by: diplomat on June 29 2007 4:41 PM

Gambling and drinking are personal choices. No government sanctioned or any other (private) establishments can force one to gamble and drink if one doesn't want to.

Don't gamble and drink and the vice taxes won't come out of your pocket.

Posted by: acrider54 on June 29 2007 5:12 PM

Well why not! The provincial Liberal government of the day has to pay (I mean we) will have to pay for the Vancouverites and the rich to enjoy the 2010 olympics and the upgrade on the Sea to Sky highway, while we plod along trying to miss potholes and avoid ruts on our roads and highways in the interior.

Posted by: diplomat on June 29 2007 7:40 PM

I had the (dis)pleasure of driving the Sea-to-Sky *highway* a few years ago and the need to upgrade it and make it safer existed already at that time.

Now is as good a time as any to do it - the province is booming and out of the doldrums.

Our own potholes and cracks need better attention as well but how are we going to persuade them to do it?

If we vote them out we will get a government that does not believe that building or maintaining highways has a priority higher than a definite very low.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on June 29 2007 8:20 PM

175 slot machine would be a good start for the Shelley Band Casino. If there is a need for more gambling give it to the indians (or what ever they like to be called these days) and at least get some investment in a treaty deal that is worth something.
The city doesn't need a cut of everything that happens around here. Let the indians have the slots.

Posted by: owl on June 30 2007 12:58 AM

YDPC .... I think that is worth looking at. Basically that is the situation in the USA, isn't it, other than Nevada and New Jersey's Atlantic City.

We need competition. We are breaking up monopolies virtually everywhere else, why are we allowing a single person to have all the gaming slots and tables in town?

We had the discussion tonight and someone brought up the notion that Major might be setting this up to go on the market. He built it up. Any good gambler and investor knows when it is time to quit and cash in. That time might be soon. Make the pot a bit sweeter by removing a show lounge and moving in some more machines.

Where is the hotel expansion, BTW?

Posted by: thereasonableman on June 30 2007 6:12 PM

Let the indians have the slots, I'll take the sluts, and Yama, Owl and diplobat can all try to get tickets for the pubic hearing.

Now everybody's happy !
-----------------------
An aside: Why do they have to fill out an application and go through a hearing ? What a waste of time.

Why don't they just phone downtown, and say "By the way, we're adding this and building that, just to let you know."

Lastly, I take issue with this comment:

"Also who needs more parking for a downtown that is dying!"

The downtown is not dying, it's just that different people find it attractive these days, and they just don't happen to have money...or a job....or a car...or a home...or a change of clothes...or a spare needle...or any idea what street corner they are laying on...