At the Sioux Falls city council meeting Tuesday night, there was another fight of sorts. It had to do with an attorney who represents several bar and casino owners in town who just can’t get over the fact they should have ONE employee per casino. In the rest of the state, where hillbillism is alive and well, towns are allowed to have an imaginary line in between licensed casinos, so basically they can have ONE employee run two casinos. The state only allows 10 machines per VL license. This is regulated by the state, and the state legislature has NO desire to increase that number, so munipalities like to bend the rules a bit and create weird boundaries between casinos, or should I say NO boundaries.
I think the state legislature should repeal video lottery. As we have seen in Sioux Falls, all they are, are magnets for trash, robberies and various other crimes. I laughed when the attorney who was representing the casinos said that they are ‘small business owners’. He said it like they were the corner grocery store in a small town just trying to get by. Most small businesses have a business model, you pay them for a service or product. Casinos simply take your money and you get nothing in return. I can almost guarantee the state takes in less taxes then are paid out for the problems caused by video lottery. But that is a discussion for another day. Item #15, which was a 1st reading passed for a 2nd reading hearing. It’s a reach around of sorts that would allow casino owners in Sioux Falls to have ONE employee for two casinos, like a lot of other towns in South Dakota. While it passed for a 2nd reading, I think Stehly and Starr made it clear they don’t support it and that it makes the casinos less safe.
But Item #15 isn’t where this ended. While a majority of the council seem to approve of this rule change, when it came to amending and adding to the legislative priorities list at the end of the meeting, they seemed to show their true colors of hypocrisy. Starr made a motion to add to the priorities list that basically state law should change so VL casino owners could have 25 machines per license. I literally laughed out loud, and laughed even harder when the council voted down his amendment, the exact same members who were for item #15.
And they wonder why I call them hypocrites?
What should bother the city is VL pays no sales tax. Beer is free. At some, so are cocktails. There’s no tax on gambling wins less than 1200 and max win at VL is 1000. Casinos are everywhere. The state enjoys the revenue. It’s not a lot but it’s better than from sales tax. I’d rather see VL than commercial casinos. Odds are better at VL. There’s always going to be gambling. It’s prevalent but less popular. Eventually, the market will eliminate at least a third of VL places. Keep the present regulations. The state debate and enforcement will just get more complicated.
But… but..but..the economic impact.
Why don’t they just raise the wages of casino workers, so that it would be easier to find enough employees? Isn’t this the real issue here: employee availability?
The profit margin at casinos has to be enormous. You can’t tell me that they can’t pay more to their employees.
Instead of worrying about the concerns of casino owners, the council should be passing a city ordinance which requires all job postings in town to mention the starting wage of the given job. What we need in this town is wage inflation and not less employees.
One casino employee with a flyswatter and a bottle of windex is plenty.