Why aren't there Casinos around or near downtown? (Chicago, Aurora: crime rate, hotels)

[scolls]

Originally Posted by Drover

I think a major difference between Detroit and Chicago is that Chicago actually has, like, a tax base to begin with. I doubt a casino would significantly add to it, especially with lots of nearby competition. $170 million isn't exactly chump change, but Chicago gets more money than that from parking tickets.

Funny since Chicago is projecting a huge budget deficit. Beggers shouldn't be choosers. You would think any revenue would be welcome when you're facing a 600+ million deficit, no?

[urza216]

A better question is: Why WOULD there be casinos in or near downtown?

This is like asking why aren't there any strip clubs on Michigan Avenue. Wait, were you really expecting this?

Are there any casinos in Midtown Manhattan? Probably not.

[jonnynonos]

Drover is correct. Yes, of course it accounts for a substantial portion of the budget in the city of Detroit, as the city is a complete disaster overall with what I would imagine is the worst overall tax base of any metropolitan area in the history of the United Sates.

People in Detroit were and are disappointed with the casinos. They thought it would make the city a tourist attraction, which it did not. It's primary function is redistributing social security checks.

When they were building the casinos in Detroit the mayor of Atlantic City told them not to. He said "People aren't going to travel to Detroit to gamble; they don't even travel to Atlantic City to gamble, they go to Las Vegas to gamble."

Yes it will generate some revenue but in the long term it's not going to help much.

If you need proof take a trip to Detroit.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by scolls

Funny since Chicago is projecting a huge budget deficit. Beggers shouldn't be choosers. You would think any revenue would be welcome when you're facing a 600+ million deficit, no?

I suppose if we had the kind of long-term structural issues Detroit has, then maybe Chicago would be forced to do a little more begging and a little less choosing. But we have the luxury of being more circumspect about the costs of permitting casinos than a city with an annihilated industrial and business tax base that counts on casinos for 15% of its revenue (if your figures are accurate), deficit spending for another 25%, and narrowly avoided having its finances taken over by the state.

Make no mistake, the city wants in on the casino racket, but many residents aren't sure the benefits are worth it. And let's be realistic, most of the revenues wouldn't be used to address deficit spending, they'd just find new ways to spend the money.

[urza216]

If casinos open up in Chicago, the last place you will find them is downtown. However, there are places on the south and west sides that are in fact "begging" for any kind of revenue production.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by urza216

If casinos open up in Chicago, the last place you will find them is downtown. However, there are places on the south and west sides that are in fact "begging" for any kind of revenue production.

Here's a realistic question that no doubt will appeal to your race-conscious sensibilities: how many people do you think will make the trek to Austin or Pullman to hit the slots? Detroit's casinos are downtown and not out in da 'hood for a reason. Meanwhile, snobby north side aldermen can barely condescend to let distressed neighborhoods have Walmarts... try selling them on the idea of building casinos there.

[jonnynonos]

How Walmart got through:

Clout St: Meet the international investor behind council candidates

[japster28]

Chicagoland has plenty of casinos already, with Elgin, Joliet, the new one in Des Plaines and the ones in NW Indiana. I don't think we want to add any more competition to that...

[CSD610]

Originally Posted by tawfiqmp

I'm just curious. What's really stopping more hotel casinos and casinos from opening up in the downtown area?

I read it may have had something to do with opposition from churches.

I'm not saying Chicago should go all vegas or anything but a few Casinos would most definitely improve nightlife.

I believe it has something to do with the requirement to be a "boat" which means one has to be on the water. It does not have to move but has to be docked on the river.

[japster28]

Originally Posted by CSD610

I believe it has something to do with the requirement to be a "boat" which means one has to be on the water. It does not have to move but has to be docked on the river.

The Rivers Casino doesn't have a body of water. I think Chicago was trying to pose an argument that Lake Michigan was a good substitute before they stopped that rule.