Worcester Activist Says Slots Deal a “Disaster” for City
Thursday, April 25, 2013
At this week’s city council meeting, Schaeffer-Duffy requested that City Manager Michael O’Brien provide a report on the impact a slots gambling parlor would have on the poor in Worcester. While he and others unleashed testimonies to council on the adverse effects of the proposed slots parlor, council voted to have O’Brien negotiate an agreement.
“If testimony hadn’t been given you could maybe give [council members] the benefit of the doubt, but it was positively astonishing,” he said. “As a local person, I’m never going to vote for them again – those who voted for this. They’re all done as far as I’m concerned. This is extremely irresponsible.”
A “Cowardly” Council
When asked how he felt about the issue after this week’s council meeting, Schaeffer-Duffy said, “Since last night, when the council voted the way it did to advise him to negotiate and bring forward some kind of deal, they abdicated their responsibility to make wise financial decisions. They did a pretty cowardly thing, hiding behind voters to decide this, even when they know how many churches, colleges, synagogues – the majority are against it.”
He said that given the comprehensive information presented to council members, it was baffling how they arrived at their decision.
Schaeffer-Duffy also added that while some members of council are raising the potential boost to the job market, “these are low paying jobs. They’re saying we should be happy to see that, and that it’s better than nothing, but that’s a bad argument. They say it’s better than them being in the pip shelter – but how much money does it cost to have them there?”
“This company will spend a lot in the short term for the millions it will take out of the city in the long term,” he said. “Voting as they did last night, they more or less assured that this proposal would be victorious.”
Not the First Time
While Schaeffer-Duffy said he was amazed at the final decision, he said it is not the first time this type of situation has occurred.
“Most said nothing or said that this is the City Manager’s decision, but this isn’t the first time they’ve done something like this,” he said. “Twenty years ago there was a similar situation and backlash about bringing JROTC into public schools. There was an active campaign and 18 people testified why it was a bad deal.”
Like this week’s council meeting, he said that there was lots of information revealed, like the need for three successive years of voting against JROTC programs needed to ban it after implementation. Schaeffer-Duffy said they also revealed that the program paid for the full price of teachers at first but eventually offered nothing.
“And it’s the same type of situation. That original sweetener is far less than the reality.”
And the reality, he says, is a clear effect to the city’s low-income residents, colleges, and economy.
Effects on the Poor and the Colleges
Schaeffer-Duffy has been working in a community that shelters the homeless and has been involved in that kind of work in Worcester and in Washington DC for almost 30 years.
“There are two issues here vis-a-vis the poor that will cause issues. The first issue revolves around problems of the compulsive gambler that becomes poor because of gambling – loses it all, wipes out children’s college funds,” he said. “While that can happen with all kinds of gambling – legal and illegal, statistics show that slots are particularly egregious towards this problem.”
He said that on the types of slot machines proposed to come to Worcester, one can play slots up to 1600 times in an hour.
“The types of slots that this company uses can electronically connect to your bank account, so it’s not just going to drain the money you bring with you. You can walk in and walk out bankrupt – not just empty handed, but bankrupt,” he said.
Schaeffer-Duffy added that these particular slots send messages of a “false victory” when you’ve “almost won” to encourage more gambling.
“From studies I’ve read, it’s considered the crack cocaine of gambling,” he said. “Unlike poker gaming tables where there’s time involved there and skill – even though odds heavily favor the house, in these instances it’s particularly favored to the house.”
While the poor are a clear target for economic burdens from a slots parlor, Schaeffer-Duffy also pointed out that Worcester’s colleges, a large part of the city’s identity and makeup, would also naturally hurt from the proposed parlor.
“None of them want to tout in their admissions booklet that Worcester has a slots parlor, and no one wants to get off 290 and see a casino. This proposed plan would greatly harm WPI, Clark, and Holy Cross in particular. It would be extremely damaging to those schools and the reputations of them and the city. It’s a disaster.”
Economic Burdens
Schaeffer-Duffy said that the second aspect of the effect on the population is how the city’s economy is going to respond.
“The economy is bad, and times are hard,” he said. “Many people, even working people, don’t earn a living wage. Those folks on many levels are desperate to piece together their lives. Poor people will not necessarily problem gamble, but they will spend money they don’t have. The stats show that the kind of people who go are middle to low income, not wealthy people.”
Like the JROTC issue, Schaeffer-Duffy says that another indirect harm from the slots parlor would be the tax revenue.
“It’s always less than the social causes to those who fall through the cracks. You make a little bit of money initially because they come in with bribes, essentially,” he said.
A Problem Many Cities Face
While Schaeffer-Duffy said he is upset with the Worcester city council, he added that this is an issue many cities are seeing.
“Cities are strapped, and politicians have no long term answers,” he said. “You’re seeing the same issue in city after city with sports stadiums and the like. They don’t like to admit it. They’re relying on the jobs manta, but the stats don’t bare it out. It’s very short sighted… stupid actually.”
Any Hopes for the Counter Groups?
While he isn’t necessarily optimistic, Schaeffer-Duffy said that occasionally “big money comes in for a big campaign.”
“Sometimes the counter does, but it’s not very often. People here have mounted a very broad coalition opposed to this,” he said. “But usually, it doesn’t matter how much people put forward, it just can’t compete with the company.”
Most often, he said, the corporate – or both sides – will spend thousands of dollars that “should have been spent elsewhere.”
This week’s council meeting saw two other requests to the City Manager for reports on how slots will affect the city, including a request from School Committee member, Tracy O'Connell Novick, that the City Manager examine and report the impact of the proposed slots parlor on youth and schools in the community prior to opening negotiation of any host community mitigation agreement. Colin Novick also requested that the City Council ask the City Manager to report the effect the proposed slots parlor will have on the city business environment and resultant impacts.
Related Articles
- Could A Slots Parlor Take Off In Worcester?
- Heated Testimony Fires Up Slots Debate at City Council Forum
- Is A Slots Parlor A Good Choice For Worcester?
- Research Bureau Says Worcester Slot Parlor Would Do More Harm Than Good
- NEW: Chicago Casino Firm Sets Sights on Worcester for Slots Parlor
- Slots Developers Kick Off Talks With Worcester Officials
- Slots in Worcester - A Play by Play
Follow us on Pinterest Google + Facebook Twitter See It Read It