OLR Report: "since the casinos opened, index (serious) crimes have increased overall"
According to the media, a presumptuous “signing ceremony” has been planned by tribal and elected officials for a new “revenge casino” in East Windsor. I say, “revenge casino” because it is being built to “blunt” the financial pinch tribe members expect to feel when a new casino, owned by a rival, is built in Massachusetts. (Of course, everybody knows that the revenues at the two existing CT casinos have been decreasing long before now.) And it is “presumptuous” because any new casino, with gambling, not on tribal property, would require the approval of our duly elected officials at the State Capitol.
For the promise of a certain number of jobs of unknown quality, and a hefty sum of money and two job fairs, temporary elected officials in East Windsor have “approved” a new casino that would forever change the nature of their town. They plan to change it because, according to one resident, the community has been in “neutral”. If only other CT towns had faired so well this past decade!
How was East Windsor chosen you ask? According to the tribes, East Windsor has been selected because the elected officials did not involve the community in their discussion. You see, the poor elected officials in Windsor Locks discussed holding a referendum, some officials briefly balked, and that was enough for the tribes to quickly reject their two potential locations.
Also, escaping the media’s attention, were the veiled threats made by the tribes about filing lawsuits at
the February 23 Information Forum held without opponents at the Legislative Office Building if elected officials don’t approve their plans. Amazing.
I’m not sure why East Windsor and surrounding town residents should help “blunt” the economic impact on the tribes’ extensive coffers. All casinos will continue to lose money long term and what real alternative will there be except to plan even more gamey casinos? Connecticut should not foster this casino arms race at the expense of our communities.
Small town communities and their local governments exist to protect and plan for the future of their citizenry. What allegiance should they have to going-broke, out-of-town salesmen? Shouldn’t elected officials pursue something better than just the superficial promises of increased revenue? What price
will really be paid by the community! Before temporary elected officials change the community of East Windsor forever, they should consider the real cost of increased crime (because there will be). They should consider the crimes against the family to be paid in increased debt, addiction, welfare, prostitution, sex trafficking, alcoholism, drug abuse and more.
From a 2002 Office of Legislative Report on Connecticut casinos and crime . . “The Foxwoods Casino opened in Ledyard in 1992; Mohegan Sun opened in Montville in 1996. Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) data show that since the casinos opened, index (serious) crimes have increased overall in Ledyard, Montville, Norwich, North Stonington, and Preston combined. Index crimes are murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft (MVT).”
Consider also that according to First Selectman Maynard, “the agreement approved on Saturday came together at noon on Friday.” Can that really be sufficient time to consider and approve the permanent changes to the local community? Hasn’t the Hartford area been burned enough by fleeting promises of fake revenue? I’m looking at you, Yard Goats.
What can you do? Contact the members of the Public Safety and Security Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly (see below). Visit http://nomorecasinosinct.org. “Like” and share posts by https://www.facebook.com/Nomorecasinosinct/, of which Family Institute of Connecticut is a member.
This is more information from the “No East Windsor Casino” Facebook page . . . Please contact the members of the Public Safety and Security Committee. Call, write and make appointments with these legislators to tell them we are against casino expansion. Please do not sit on the sidelines! We all need to get involved!
S03 Co-Chair Larson, Timothy D.http://www.senatedems.ct.gov/Larson.php D
020 Chair Verrengia, Joehttp://www.housedems.ct.gov/Verrengia/ D
S35 Co-Chair Guglielmo, Anthonyhttp://www.ctsenaterepublicans.com/home-guglielmo R
S08 Vice Chair Witkos, Kevin D.http://www.ctsenaterepublicans.com/home-witkos R
S04 Vice Chair Cassano, Stevehttp://www.senatedems.ct.gov/Cassano.php D
048 Vice Chair Orange, Linda A.http://www.housedems.ct.gov/Orange D
112 Ranking Member Sredzinski, J.P.http://www.cthousegop.com/Sredzinski/main/ R
S30 Member Miner, Craighttp://www.ctsenaterepublicans.com/home-MinerR
S23 Member Gomes, Edwin A.http://www.senatedems.ct.gov/Gomes.php D
051 Member Rovero, Daniel S.http://www.housedems.ct.gov/Rovero D
089 Member Zupkus, Lezlyehttp://www.cthousegop.com/Zupkus/main/ R
146 Member Adams, Terry B.http://www.housedems.ct.gov/Adams D
109 Member Arconti, Davidhttp://www.housedems.ct.gov/Arconti D
003 Member Gonzalez, Minniehttp://www.housedems.ct.gov/Gonzalez D
144 Member Simmons, Carolinehttp://www.housedems.ct.gov/Simmons D
052 Member Vail, Kurthttp://www.cthousegop.com/Vail/main/ R
050 Member Boyd, Patrick S.http://www.housedems.ct.gov/Boyd D
116 Member DiMassa, Michael A.http://www.housedems.ct.gov/DiMassa D
097 Member Paolillo, Alphonsehttp://www.housedems.ct.gov/Paolillo D
044 Member Dauphinais, Annehttp://www.cthousegop.com/Dauphinais/main/ R
090 Member Fishbein, Craig C.http://www.cthousegop.com/Fishbein/main/ R
081 Member Fusco, Johnhttp://www.cthousegop.com/Fusco/main/ R
064 Member Ohler, Brian M.http://www.cthousegop.com/Ohler/main/ R
036 Member Siegrist, Robert W.http://www.cthousegop.com/Siegrist/main/ R
045 Member Skulczyck, Kevinhttp://www.cthousegop.com/Skulczyck/main/ R