82% of those surveyed reported that they would be opposed to a casino located within 12 blocks of their home.
Presently there is a push for legislation banning the placement of casinos within 1500 feet of a residential neighborhood.
Do you support this legislation? If not, why not?
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
I support the citizens’ right to have their voices heard in the planning process through the referendum on the upcoming primary ballot.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
I support the referendum seeking input from Philadelphians on their views as to whether such a provision should be added to the charter.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
I support giving Philadelphians the opportunity to vote on this matter. Casinos will impact people’s homes and neighborhoods and they have a right to provide input and be heard.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
I support the current ballot initiative and am the only mayoral candidate who supported Casino Free Philadelphia financially. Philadelphians have been frozen out of a process that will have a dramatic impact on their daily lives. While I personally oppose the building of casinos, I believe the issue deserves to be on the ballot so that Philadelphians’ voices can be heard.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
88% of the survey respondents indicated that they believed the City should control site selection with input from its citizens.
What processes do you believe should be instituted regarding casino site selection?
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
As mentioned, I am supportive of the entire Penn’s Landing planning process currently being conducted under an innovative partnership between the Inquirer, Penn Praxis, and the Design Advocacy Group. This process has solicited and encouraged input from thousands of Philadelphians in what is a model for public input and thorough planning.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
Local zoning laws should apply to any site selected and the city should have significant input on where casinos are sited by working collaboratively with the state, to ensure that citizen input is factored into site selection decisions. But the city does not have the power to override state law in this matter.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
As above, I support local control and input, which includes the site selection process.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
It should be a well-planned zoning process that promotes the health, safety, and welfare of Philadelphia residents. I do not support gambling as an economic development tool or as a way to fund ongoing government programs, no matter how worthy.
There is highly controversial evidence about whether the benefits are sustainable over time and whether those benefits exceed the substantial costs of gambling and the facilities that house it. One of my opponents supported this policy in the General Assembly and that is one of many differences between us. But this debate is properly one to be held in Harrisburg.
What does concern Philadelphia is the process by which casino gambling is coming to our city. That process is flawed and inappropriate. Of the many problems in that process, the most consequential was the link made between operators and locations in the awarding of licenses, which obscured any thoughtful debate over neighborhood impacts.
Philadelphians are right to protest the decisions made under that flawed process. I support placing the question on the May ballot, as voted unanimously by City Council last week. That question does not challenge the state’s basic proposal for casino gambling in Philadelphia, but rather addresses only the specific question of location.
The state Supreme Court was very clear in its decision stating that if the legislature wanted to take away our zoning powers then the legislature must provide the City with clear standards. In response, the legislature did not take away those powers or provide clear standards, but simply rushed an expedient and half-baked amended version of the gaming legislation. That amended legislation does not do want the Court told the legislature to do. In effect, we still have our power to control the land use aspects of gaming in the City, including the siting of the casinos.
The legislature dropped the ball. The citizens of Philadelphia have picked it up and I support their thoughtful and energetic campaign to fix the bad decisions made by a flawed process. I am confident that the Supreme Court will, in fact, uphold the zoning rule reflected in the referendum as a legitimate exercise of our zoning powers. This may well force the legislature to take them away. But I welcome the open debate that would follow such a heavy-handed exercise of raw power by the legislature.
Assuming that the referendum passes, and I believe it will overwhelmingly, then the issue will be to quickly find new locations, ones that follow the new 1500 foot rule, for the two existing operators. This should be done quickly in order to pursue the policy goals that the Governor and legislature have every right to legislate. Our fight is with the process. The referendum will allow is to fix its biggest flaw: the marriage of operators and locations and I ask Philadelphians to vote yes on the ballot question.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
I believe that planning and zoning are matters vested with local municipalities. Philadelphia should have the ability to shape how it looks and does business. Therefore, I believe that casino development should go through the zoning, planning, and permitting process just like any other proposed project. Failure to do so would result in the community being shut out of the process.
WANT TO COMMENT? Learn how to add your comments.
