29 September 2005
Chris Jacobs, Mary Bartley, Bruce Jackson, Rev. Dr. G. Stanford Bratton
Why a gambling joint in the heart of Buffalo is a lousy idea and an illegal deal
Statements before the Buffalo Common Council Community Development Committee, 28 September 2005
The Buffalo News has editorialized that the casino Governor George Pataki and the Senecas want to build in the heart of Buffalo is a done deal, so Buffalo folks should just come to terms with the rape of their city and try to get the most they can out of a lousy deal. That is exactly the same advice the Buffalo News offered seven years ago when it said the ugly and anachronistic steel twin span the Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority said it was going to put up alongside the Peace Bridge was all the citizens of Buffalo were going to get, so they should make the best of that lousy design. Both times, instead of saying "Fight for what's right" the Buffalo News counseled, "Live with it."
Eight speakers* at the September 28 meeting of the Buffalo Common Council's Community Development subcommittee meeting offered reasons why they don't accept the Buffalo News's advice that we be compliant victims. They said a casino will do the city irreparable harm and we must do whatever we can to stop it. It will increase the amount of compulsive gambling with which the city is already trying do cope. It suck a huge amount of money out of all of Buffalo's cultural and entertainment operations, as well as other commercial enterprises, and will forever remove significant parcels of city land from the tax rolls. It will create huge domestic problems that will cause enduring human harm. And that's just the beginning of the problems Pataki's deal with the Senecas would impose on the citizens of Buffalo.
The Common Council wasn't part of the Pataki/Seneca negotiations and neither did it have the option of approving or disapproving the deal. Pataki and a lapdog legislature said, "Here it is. Live with it." But perhaps there are better options. Perhaps the Council can stand up and say, "We don't want to have our city exploited this way." The Council can join the several lawsuits now in process with amicus briefs letting the courts know how much Pataki's deal will harm the citizens of this region. At the very least, the Council should go on record voicing its strong opposition to the modern equivalent of taxation without representation.
Here are the prepared remarks of four of the speakers at the subcommittee meeting: Chris Jacobs, Mary Bartley, Bruce Jackson and Rev. Dr. G. Stanford Bratton:
Chris Jacobs
Thank you for the opportunity to speak here today on this important issue.
I have two main perspectives on this issue, one is as a citizen and business person, running a real estate development company that is vested in downtown Buffalo. The second is as a member of the Buffalo Board of Education. I want to briefly address both perspectives.
As a citizen and developer, I look at our city and the progress that has been made over the last several years and there is much that has been achieved. When I graduated from college in 1990 there were about three bars on Chippewa. Now there are about twenty, and restaurants, and coffee houses, and a new hotel—just to name a few positive developments. More recently we have seen the success of residential developments/loft apartments in downtown: the Sidway, the old Berger building, the Elk and Ellicott street lofts and many on the drawing board. And our culturals continue to thrive even despite budget cuts.
All these positives even under the cloud of a control board. But I do believe the control board has provided a catalyst for some very needed governmental reforms in this City to make us a more efficient and effective government …a government for the 21st century.
So, commercial, residential, cultural and government reform…these are all real and substantive activities that I believe will make our city vibrant again. Basically, I would call this a focus on the fundamental infrastructure of a city to create real and long term economic rebirth. And this body deserves praise for their critical involvement in these efforts.
Now, casinos: what do I see them doing? Do I see them creating jobs? Yes, I do. But I only see them creating jobs under the roof and within the walls of the casino. This is what is being seen in Niagara Falls (and a recent study bears this fact out). But, hey, should we, as a struggling city, be snubbing our noses at one thousand good paying casino jobs? We’ll my point is I do not believe there will be a net new job creation of a thousand jobs. We are not a wealthy community. Our citizens have a finite amount of disposable income. Money spent at the casino will not be spent somewhere else. Thus, the casino will certainly drain funds away from local restaurants, sporting and cultural venues and other attractions, causing a decline in employment on that side of the equation.
One common argument for casinos is, 'Hey, gambling is all around us. We suffer the negatives and don’t benefit from the revenues....a certain number of people, no more, no less, gamble…better to have them do it here than in Fort Erie or Niagara Falls…'I don’t completely agree with that. Studies show that the more gambling venues there are and the closer proximity they are to folks, the higher the percentage of folks in that community will gamble. And the higher the number of people in a community that gamble, the percentage of those with gambling addiction and the related pathologies that go with it. This fact is exacerbated greatly if that community is a high poverty community, like this one. Thus, a gambling venue in our backyard will hurt the most vulnerable in our community more than any one group.
This harm to low-income families is where my school board hat comes in. We all know that we don’t educate children in a vacuum; the problems in their home and their neighborhood greatly impact their ability to learn. If casinos increase gambling addictions and other destructive activities, we will see more trauma on already vulnerable families and that will inevitably impact the children in our schools and their ability to be prepared to learn and achieve their potential.
Now back to some of the arguments casino proponents make. They argue that we are going to have “boutique” casino here in Buffalo, meaning it will just be a casino with perhaps a small restaurant. That it won’t attempt to have everything under the sun (oodles of restaurants, entertainment venues) and monopolize all the money. That people will go gambling and then leave to go to local restaurants and bars. That certainly sounds great. But I just don’t know if there is any way you can guarantee that. You are giving land to a sovereign nation and they can do anything they want. I believe their main goal is to make money. Most casinos do everything in their power to eliminate reasons for you to leave. I don’t know why this would be any different. And let’s be clear, we are giving a piece of Buffalo to a sovereign nation and we can never go back. This will be a legacy we will leave to our children and our grandchildren. I for one have yet to be convinced.
In conclusion, in my view a lot of what we are doing now to bring our city back is basically fixing mistakes of the past. For instance, working to put cars back on Main Street, tearing down the Skyway, and one council member is now trying to fix the mistake of our football stadium going to Orchard Park. The difference with those actions and this one is that we do have the ability to go back fix those mistake. With this casino we are giving a piece of our city to another sovereign nation and we can never go back. I urge this council to keep that in mind as you deliberate in a decision that will impact this city for generations. Thank you.
Mary Bartley
A Buffalo casino is based on transferring land from the City of Buffalo to the Seneca Nation of Indians. This will be Seneca land forever, creating a “sovereign hole” in the City of Buffalo:—The City of Buffalo will lose jurisdiction over that land
—We will have no control over zoning or housing codes; no ability to control what the Senecas do, or how they do it, on their land. (For example: they could establish a waste treatment plant. Or, if the land contains a historic structure, they could tear it down.)
—Environmental and safety issues on the reservation will be out of our control.
—The city will bear the costs of infrastructure in perpetuity, with little or no control over these expenses.
—What arrangements will be made for waste water?
—Who provides and pays for fire protection?
—Which police force will provide law enforcement – ours or the Seneca Nation’s? If it’s ours, who pays for it?
—If crimes on Seneca land are tried in our courts, we will be paying for those court costs as well. Then again, some disputes will be resolved in the Seneca Peacemakers Court – and the rights we enjoy as US citizens do not apply there, any more than they apply in any foreign country.
—The compact provides for the Senecas to acquire land for housing. How will our school system handle the influx of children from non-taxed land?
Now, one of the reasons often given for a casino is the jobs. So let’s look at what this means:
—The Senecas can, and will, discriminate. Members of the Seneca Nation will have first priority in hiring and promotional opportunities. There is no EEO to appeal to if a non-native is passed over for promotion or fired because a less-qualified Seneca Nation member wants the job. This is their policy, and it is legal.
—Other labor rights that we take for granted would be unenforceable on Indian territory. There are no labor unions on Indian reservations.
And then there is the tax issue.
—Indian land is not subject to property tax. Even if the land acquired is not currently taxed, we would have a commercial enterprise taking place on untaxed land, putting our local businesses at a competitive disadvantage. And, the property acquired for Seneca housing will be permanently removed from the tax rolls.
—No sales tax is currently paid on Seneca territory. So, if in the future Buffalo initiates a sales tax or receives a share of the county’s penny, we would receive no revenue from the gas, cigarettes, restaurant meals or other items sold on the reservation.
—If the Senecas open a hotel (which they could do at any time, regardless of the original intent of the land transfer) they would pay no bed tax.
—Native Americans do not pay state and local taxes on income derived from goods and services produced on their territory. If at some future time the city were to establish an income tax, Senecas would be exempt.
—Keep in mind, however, that Native Americans living on reservations maintain the right to vote. Thus, they could have a major impact in local elections and policies.
Finally, let’s look at the implications of giving territory on an international border to a sovereign nation. In the past few years we have had three federal convictions for cigarette smuggling on Seneca territory. In one of those cases, part of the money funded Hezbollah, a terrorist organization. The vast majority of Native Americans are law abiding people, but the possibility of a serious breach of Homeland Security is real and should not be ignored.
For those who still believe that a gambling casino would bring benefits that outweigh the disadvantages of turning part of our city into a sovereign nation, there is one more important consideration. .
The plaintiffs in Dalton v. Pataki, which argues that the Seneca compact is invalid because the New York State constitution prohibits casino gambling, are petitioning for a review by the US Supreme Court. Also, legislation has been proposed in the United States Senate would amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to specifically disallow Indian gambling where gambling would otherwise be disallowed by state law, such as New York State. Either of these could shut down the Seneca casinos. But neither would reverse the land transfer. So, we would have given away our land for nothing. At the very least, we should oppose the land transfer until this issue is resolved.
Before land can be taken into trust for the Senecas there will be a public comment period. I urge the Common Council as a body, and its members individually, to write to Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton during the public comment period, opposing this land transfer.
Bruce JacksonI want to thank the Council for the opportunity to speak here today. I am Bruce Jackson, SUNY Distinguished Professor and Samuel P. Capen Professor of American Culture, University at Buffalo. I'm speaking as a member of the board of directors of the Market Arcade Film and Arts Center, the non-profit corporation that operates the Market Arcade theater on behalf of the building's owner, the City of Buffalo. The Market Arcade is the only eight-screen publicly-owned movie theater in the United States. Many community arts and educational organizations now regularly use the Market Arcade for film series and similar events. We're surrounded by other public and private arts organizations trying to enrich the life of downtown Buffalo: Studio Arena, CEPA Gallery, Righteous Babe, the Tralf, and many more.
We are all marginal operations. It won't take much to destroy what so many individuals and organizations have worked so hard to build, to subtract from our community what so many individuals and organizations work so hard to provide. In the past five years all of these organizations have suffered severe cuts in city and county support, so the condition of Buffalo's arts and entertainment organizations is more fragile than ever.
Dollars spent in a town are not spent once. They have a life, a trajectory. They multiply. The money you spend in a restaurant pays for the restaurant's physical plant, its supplies and utilities, and its employees. If the suppliers and utility providers and workers are within the community, they in turn spend the money they get from that restaurant, and that spending provides more jobs and more taxes. All studies show that the arts have the highest dollar multiplier of any kind of spending within a community. The money spent at Studio Arena, Albright Knox Art Gallery, the Market Arcade or at any of the theaters or concert venues comes back to help us again and again.
Casino spending, on the other hand, has the lowest multiplier effect of any kind of spending. It is money that doesn't stay around; it is money sucked out of the community as soon as it is spent. It goes to the owners and operators of the casino, none of whom are community residents. In our case, the casino owners wouldn't even pay local taxes. PILOT payments never make up for that tax loss. The jobs provided by a casino are mostly minimum-wage jobs, and they come at the cost of the jobs they displace in the locally-owned establishments they drive out of existence. The only economic benefit a community gets from a tax-exempt casino is the money made during the initial construction. That is a short-lived gain for a few in trade for a long-term loss for the many: greedy developers might be happy with that deal; it does nothing for the rest of us and we should do anything we can to reject it.
If you need evidence of this, go sometime to Atlantic City, which has a huge gambling operation on the boardwalk. The boardwalk is clean and the casino fronts are shiny. But you take your life in your hands if you walk one block off the boardwalk. You will go by boarded-up stores, broken windows, empty buildings, cheap joints and substandard housing. The casinos on the boardwalk of Atlantic City have done nothing for the rest of that city except drag it further into despair. A casino on Buffalo's waterfront or in its downtown will do the same for us.
Spending for the arts in Buffalo is primarily local discretionary spending. It is primarily local discretionary spending that will be sucked up by a Buffalo casino. Travelers from distant places who come to this region to gamble are going to do it in Niagara Falls, not Buffalo. People who come from a few hours away to gamble in Buffalo will not go outside the casino for anything other than to get in their cars and drive back home. Local people will go to the casino and they'll also get in their cars and go back home.
It's zero-sum. There is no other place for the money to come from. All the local money going into a Buffalo casino is money not going into something else in Buffalo. It is money that will not go to stores, shops, restaurants and arts organizations in Buffalo.
What do you want: theater, music, films, art and everything connected with those activities, or a building with no clocks and no windows that sucks the life out of those activities?
I don't know if it is too late to stop this deal that the governor worked out and imposed on us without consulting any of us, without giving any of us even a chance to tell him what matters to us as a community. That is no reason you shouldn't do whatever you can to protect this city. Indeed, it is all the more reason for you to stand up and say, "You can't impose this on us. You can't do this to us. We won't stand for it."
Good morning. I’m G. Stanford Bratton, Executive Director of the Network of Religious Communities, an organization of denominations, congregations and religious organizations located in Western New York and with offices on Delaware Avenue in Buffalo. I am a resident of the city of Buffalo and an ordained clergy person with a doctorate in social ethics. My academic training indicates that I’m more concerned with the morals of human communities and the shaping of social policy than I am with the private behavior of individual citizens.
My research has led me to the conclusion that casino gambling is a failed economic development strategy which in its current form is constitutionally illegal in New York State. Others have addressed the failure of casinos to provide economic development; I would like to address the governmental and constitutional issues.
The New York State Constitution was written following a period when every state in the union had outlawed lotteries and gambling in reaction to the enormous political corruption gambling had fostered in every state in the Union. As a result the framers of the New York State Constitution made all forms of gambling illegal. The framers of the constitution did, however, provide a means to amend the constitution and in this regard, to legalize particular forms of gambling. The amendment process required that a constitutional amendment be approved by both houses in two successive legislatures, followed by a public referendum in which the majority of the citizens of the state must approve the amendment. Four such amendments were
approved: in 1937 through which parimutual betting was legalized; in 1957 when charitable bingo was legalized; in 1966 when the state lottery was legalized; and in 1976 when off track betting was legalized.
In 1996 an effort was mustered to amend the New York State Constitution to legalize casino gambling in New York. That year I helped organize a broad-based coalition of religious and community groups, called the Western New York Coalition Against Casino Gambling. We, along with groups throughout New York State issued public statements, sponsored public forums and debates, contacted our legislators and mobilized a large number of citizens to oppose the legalization of casino gambling. In late January 1997 the effort to legalize casino gambling was overwhelmingly defeated in the New York State Senate and Majority Leader Joseph Bruno promised that the issue would not be brought up again in the session.
By the time of the defeat of the amendment to the New York State Constitution, I had come to understand that the spread of casino gambling is more than a failed community development strategy; it is bad public policy. I contend that casino gambling is a cancer that is changing the very relationship between a government and its citizens.
Since at least the 1930’s government has served as a protector of its citizens through a host of laws and regulations designed to protect workplace conditions, health and safety, environment, civil rights, and so forth. Beginning with the legalization of state lotteries there began a dangerous shift in the fundamental role of government from being a regulator of gambling to a promoter of gambling. In the quest for enormous gambling dollars states and local governments began promoting, and joining in the promotion of gambling, particularly to our most vulnerable citizens; the elderly, the poor, the young and the addicted. With the spread of casino gambling, governments have completely abandoned their regulatory role and abdicated their responsibility for their citizens’ welfare.
Even before the defeat of the casino gambling amendment in the New York State Senate, plans were being formulated to circumvent the constitution. Prophetically. in an October 14, 1996 editorial the editor of the Buffalo News wrote, “Backers should be ashamed if the Indian deal is used to get around a gambling referendum.” Likewise one of the potential developers of a Western New York casino said to me following the defeat in the legislature. “Don’t think that the constitution is going to stand in our way.”
In 1999 I joined with several other New York citizens, including a member of the N.Y. Assembly and a member of the N.Y. State Senate in challenging, in the New York Supreme Court, the authority of the governor to negotiate a compact with an Indian nation. In his ruling Justice Teresi held that, according to the New York State Constitution the Governor does not have the authority to negotiate a treaty with an Indian Tribe. Judge Teresi’s decision has been upheld in the New York State Court of Appeals. The United States Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal of NY Governor George Pataki.
On June 21, 2001 Governor George Pataki and President Cyrus Schindler of the Seneca Nation of Indians held a press conference at Niagara Falls to announce a deal to bring three casinos to Western New York, including one in Buffalo. Several days later, on June 29, 2001, a significant number of religious leaders, representing the vast majority of denominations in Western New York, as well as congregations on the Cattaraugus and Seneca Reservations, did announce their opposition to the proposed compact. They also called upon the Governor to release the full text of the proposed compact and called upon Erie County Executive Giambra and Mayor Masiello to present a comprehensive gambling impact statement prior to joining any effort to introduce casino gambling in Western NY. Over the next month many thousands of signatures opposing the compact were collected in area congregations and delivered to the offices of New York Assembly Majority Leader Paul Tokasz.
It appeared that significant opposition to the proposed compact was growing when the events of September 11, 2001 occurred. Late in the evening of Wednesday October 24, 2001 and in the early hours of October 25, 2001 the members of both houses of the New York State Legislature were presented with an 81-page bill which the governor said would stimulate the State’s economy following September 11, 2001. The proposed legislation was not subject to committee study; no public hearings were held and no opportunity was provided for input by the public. The process failed to meet the constitutional requirement of printed copies of legislation being on legislators’ desks three days prior to a vote being taken. The bill, approving the compact negotiated by the Governor with the President of the Seneca Nation, was approved, unread, without debate, by both houses of the legislature.
In early January 2002 several citizens from across New York State, including a member of the NY Assembly, a member of the NY Senate and myself filed suit in New York Supreme Court challenging the legality of the Compact negotiated by the governor and approved by both houses of the legislature. We had taken this action to obtain a judgment declaring the compact unconstitutional both in regard to the legislative process which violated the prescribed constitutional process for enacting legislation and because the legislation itself is illegal because the legislature and the governor cannot circumvent the prescribed process for amending the constitution.
It has been suggested that under the Federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA) the Governor would be allowed to enter into so-called “tribal-state compacts” with Native American tribes to permit the operation of commercial gambling by the tribe. However, according to IGRA, before tribal-state compacts authorizing gambling on land not presently part of a reservation can be effective, the Governor must make a finding under IGRA that such gambling “would not be detrimental to the surrounding community." The Governor, cannot make such a finding, given the provisions of Article 1 section 9 of the New York State Constitution prohibiting commercialized gambling and the State’s public policy that commercial gambling is detrimental to the welfare and morals of the citizenry.
The case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. We are confident that the U.S. Supreme Court will find that the compact negotiated by Governor Pataki and President Schindler is unconstitutional.
To me, a citizen of New York State and the city of Buffalo, the attempt by the Governor and certain unelected power brokers and influence-peddlers to circumvent the constitution of New York State represents a fundamental breach of the basic relationship between a government and its people. It has long been held that we are a nation of laws not of men, but in this instance it appears that the law does not matter, only the interests of a well-connected, particular few.Further, Article One of the United States Constitution begins “All legislative powers here granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” The same applies to New York State. In the instance of the Compact with the Seneca Nation of Indians there has been a fundamental breach in the separation of powers. In this instance a compact written by the Governor and certain special interest groups was approved unread, without debate by the NY State Legislature. In so doing the legislators have abdicated their constitutional responsibility and delegated their constitutional authority to the executive officer of the state. This I would suggest should be a matter of grave concern for every citizen of New York State.
I appeal to you, members of the Buffalo Common Council to inform yourselves as to the impact of Casino Gambling upon this community and to speak out about the violation of the New York State Constitution.Although you, like every other citizen of the State of New York, have been deprived of the constitutional guarantee of a right to be heard and to vote upon this matter, you must not remain silent. In addition to the above, there are other legitimate concerns which need to be raised about having another nation, with its own laws, policies and courts, located in the center of the city of Buffalo; about the city of Buffalo not having a voice regarding the operation of a casino within the city limits while still having significant financial liability for its presence; and about the right of the Seneca Nation to acquire adjacent land for housing, restaurants, hotels or even a shopping center all exempt from taxation by Buffalo, Erie County or New York State.
There are those who now suggest that Buffalo will be able to negotiate a better deal or other accommodations with the Seneca Nation once the casino is built. That, my distinguished Council members, is a fantasy. The deal is already spelled out in the compact and that my friends is, to use a familiar phrase, “all she wrote.”
For more information, visit the web site of Citizens Against Casino Gambling in Erie County: http://nosainoerie.org
*The eight speakers and their topics were:* Dr. John Welte, Senior Scientist at the Research Institute on Addictions, spoke about research showing that the introduction of a casino in Erie County
would likely double the level of problem/pathological gambling.
* Dr. Renee Wert, Director of the Gambling Recovery Program at Jewish Family Services, spoke about the human toll from gambling addiction.
* Joel Rose, co-Chairperson of Citizens Against Casino gambling in Erie County, spoke about the flow of money out of the community likely to result from a casino in Buffalo.
* Christopher Jacobs, Esq., President of Avalon Development, Board Member of Buffalo Place, Inc., and Member of the Buffalo School Board, spoke about the impact on area businesses from a casino. He also addressed the impact on children.
* Mr. Tim Tielman, Executive Director of Campaign for Buffalo, formerly of the Preservation Coalition, spoke about the impact of a casino on our architectural environment.
* Bruce Jackson, SUNY Distinguished Professor and Samuel P. Capen Professor of American Culture at the University of Buffalo, and Member of the Board of Directors of the Market Arcade Theater, spoke about the impact of a Buffalo casino on the theater district and on the arts in general.
* Mary Bartley, co-Chairperson of CACGEC, spoke about sovereignty concerns.
* Rev. Dr. Stanford Bratton, co-Executive Director of the Network of Religious Communities, spoke about the constitutional ban on gambling in New York State, and the role of government as it pertains to gambling.
Copyright 2005 by Buffalo Report, Inc.