“Frank Caliendo on June 17th and June 18th, and in July we have Charlie Daniels Band. In August, Bret Michaels, so it’ll be kind of a fun place,” Haselhoff said as she listed off the shows the event center will host in the first few months.
It amazes me how Iwegians have figured out how to pull this stuff together in less then a year, while the Pavilion has been fumbling around for over 10 years, and they still cannot decide whether R & R is appropriate. Take a chill pill already.
In his My Voice column in the Sept. 21 Argus Leader about the casino being built in Larchwood, Iowa, James Abourezk claimed:
• Seventy-two percent of visitors to the casino will come from South Dakota. What percent of Iowans come to Sioux Falls to shop and for how many years?
• South Dakotans will spend more than $55 million each year. With the current unemployment rate and no new jobs in Sioux Falls or South Dakota, how can millions of dollars be spent in Iowa?
• South Dakota will lose $18 million in video lottery revenue a year. Not every video lottery player in South Dakota will go to Larchwood instead. The estimate is unfounded.
• The casino will hire 679 employees from South Dakota, driving up wages for South Dakota businesses. If the mayor of Sioux Falls and the governor of South Dakota got on the stick and secured more employers in South Dakota, there wouldn’t be a problem. The creation of more than 600 jobs in Iowa only will help our residents get off unemployment and be productive citizens again.
• Iowa has a Buy Iowa First Policy. Why shouldn’t Iowa contractors have preference? The casino is in their state.
• Under the federal Indian gaming law, Native American tribes can open casinos off their reservations. Tribal casinos do not pay South Dakota sales tax. Does this exemption apply when the casino is off the reservation? Why should a Sioux Falls casino have to be tribally owned?
• The puritan ethics of Sioux Falls restricts the number of video lottery establishments in the city. What would move the City Council to approve a full-fledged casino.
• We should not get a bee in our bonnet over this casino. Its developers had to get permits and voter approval, and they have private investors in this venture.
• Don’t make an enemy of our neighboring state. See how the total picture unfolds. Do not create a war with Iowa.
They’d like to see the city ease the 2,000 feet restriction rule. It prohibits a bar or restaurant that offers video lottery from being built within 2,000 feet of a church, school, park or another video lottery establishment.
First off, if anything, we need to restrict video lottery even more. Having three casinos within one block of my home is ridiculous. Secondly the best way to ‘compete’ with the casino in Lyon County is to give in. Allowing VL casino owners and the state to make more money while Sioux Falls is sitting on a possible sales tax goldmine is a regressive approach. Real progressives see opportunities, not detriments. City leaders (business and city hall) need to get off their asses and extend a hand to Lyon County, and not next week or next month – TODAY! We can piss and moan and fight this all we want, but at the end of the day we can’t stop what Iowa or what Lyon County wants to do. As councilor Rex Rolfing said about the casino, “When you are handed lemons, you make lemonade.” And I see a whole lot of it flowing from Lyon County.
While the SF MSM blabbered about indoor pools and Events Centers during the municipal campaign they avoided the 700 Pound Gorilla in Lyon County;
The commission today unanimously approved the Lyon County casino, noting it wouldn’t cut into the business of Iowa’s 17 other state-licensed casinos and would draw gamblers from nearby Sioux Falls.
We can make this into a winning hand. Real leaders in Sioux Falls will find a way to work with Lyon County as a partnership in jobs and retail opportunities on the Eastside. Instead of writing guest columns to the Gargoyle Leader that do nothing to make the situation better we can turn this into something that helps Sioux Falls. As I have said all along, the only ones to be hurt by this casino is the state’s VL coffers and a few VL casino owners. Go call a whaaabulance.
The report goes on to say that “Video Lottery Terminals (VLTs) are located in bars and bar/ restaurants throughout South Dakota, including a total of 1,551 VLTs in Minnehaha County, which is the Sioux Falls area. These VLTs in Minnehaha generated net win of more than $66 million last year, or about $500 per adult resident. From this data it is clear that the propensity to gamble among Sioux Falls area residents is already quite high, although a relatively small proportion of this gaming flows to area casinos due to their distance from Sioux Falls.”
GVA Marquette Advisors believes that a new Iowa casino will shift gaming patrons from VLTs in Sioux Falls to the new casino. The company says: “From our analysis, we would expect a new casino at Lyon County would have a significant impact upon VLT revenues in south[eastern] SD, particularly in the Sioux Falls area, as more of those gaming dollars would be spent at the casino, which would offer a much more appealing facility and overall gaming experience.”
While beauracrats and development big wigs see this as a bad thing, I think it is a very positive thing. Video Lottery is a horrible way to fund government, not to mention all the crime and other social costs it brings. Anything to reduce the number of VL casinos in Sioux Falls is a move in the right direction, for society. Pierre might not like it, but who gives a shit what they think? It might finally force them to get rid of the awful funding source once and for all.
As for the pro-casino letter, I found this statement at the end of the letter very telling about how South Dakota and Sioux Falls politicians like to do business; their way or the highway;
We need to look at every so-called threat and find the opportunity. I would like to personally extend a hand across the river to the economic development team representing Sioux Falls to meet in person to work together in making our area within 100 miles of Sioux Falls the best place to work, live, play and raise a family.
Good luck with that Iowa. Our city council and county commissioners can’t even work together, what makes you think you will be able to work with them? Don’t get me wrong, I agree 100%, we should work together. Instead trying to create stupid legislation and denegrating Iowa in the media, Sioux Falls should embrace this casino, and make it a partnership effort. Sour grapes won’t help either of us.
But I’m not holding my breath. Now excuse me while I bang my head against the wall.
Hey, Sioux Falls, this is what a REAL casino looks like
Let’s face it, a casino near Larchwood will actually be good for the Sioux Falls economy. It will provide good paying jobs with benefits (yes, Las Vegas style casino’s are excellent places to work) and people who visit the casino from other parts of Iowa probably will come to Sioux Falls to do some shopping. But the naysayers (crap-hole video lottery casino owners who have been robbing us blind for years) are crying in Sioux Falls. Let’s be honest, most citizens don’t care if you lose significant revenue or go out of business for good. That’s why when a VL lottery ban made it to the ballot box twice a majority of Sioux Falls residents said ‘Get rid of it’ we are sick and tired of it and the crime problems it has brought to our city.
“We believe that a new full-service resort casino at Lyon County would attract the majority of its customers from the greater Sioux Falls area,” a study by GVA Marquette Advisors said.
“Let’s be honest,” said Glenn Anderson, Lyon County’s economic development director, “we have the thanks to give to Sioux Falls. That’s the bottom line.”
South Dakota Sen. Scott Heidepriem, who tried to outmaneuver the Iowa plan with legislation earlier this year, called it “bad news for Sioux Falls.”
Bad news for the state VL coffers, that’s about it.
Kehl Management, which is sponsoring the Lyon County plan, wants to build a casino with 800 slot machines, 24 gaming tables, a 100-room hotel and an 18-hole golf course. The resort would be similar to Kehl’s Riverside Casino & Golf Resort in Riverside, Iowa.
Oh you mean there will actually be other things to do there besides smoking cigarettes and drinking cheap American tap beer!? You mean it will actually offer OTHER entertainment?! Where do they get off! Sioux Falls residents like their casinos small, dark, smokey and in a bad neighborhood. Anything else is unacceptable! C’mon Iwegions! Get with the program.
The study also concluded that a Lyon County casino would have a “significant impact” on video lottery revenues in the Sioux Falls area.
Like I said in the beginning, this would only affect a handful of casino owners not Sioux Falls residents as a whole.
“I’m sure there would be a lot of jobs created for Sioux Falls people,” Ketterer said. “I’m sure Larchwood couldn’t fill all of those jobs.”
If it’s built, Heidepriem predicted Sioux Falls and South Dakota would inherit the social and criminal costs that piggyback with gambling while seeing none of the revenue.
Sorry, Scott, but I am going to call big fat bullshit on you! If you and the other legislators are so freaking concerned about our safety and wellbeing you would have gotten rid of video lottery a long, long, time ago. I doubt we have to worry about little old ladies playing golf and slot machines as a ‘social and criminal’ concern. We need to get rid of our shithole VL casinos in Sioux Falls, then we will truly see the savings in social costs.
When the House State Affairs Committee rejected a proposed constitutional amendment on gambling sponsored by Senate Democratic Leader Scott Heidepriem of Sioux Falls, House Assistant Republican Leader Kristi Noem of Castlewood questioned Heidepriem’s motives.
Noem said Heidepriem’s law firm represents a client involved in gambling.
Heidepriem said he was stunned by the suggestion he would promote a measure out of personal interest.
I’m STUNNED a lawyer would think it unusual to question their motives. Give me a f’ing break.
Trying to use a rather obscure, defensive posture is an unusual attempt to remedy a perceived threat to the state’s gambling revenues. But no matter how good the intention, this particular strategy isn’t something to encode in the South Dakota Constitution.
That last part got my gander up to, talk about opening a big f’ing can of worms.
Supporters of the bill say the Lyons County casino could siphon potential gambling revenues from South Dakota while leaving the state to deal with the casino’s social costs.
No it won’t. It will provide good jobs, more retail revenue to the eastside of Sioux Falls and on a positive note possibly close down some of those telephone booth casinos on the eastside.
Sen. Scott Heidepriem, D-Sioux Falls, says the state might scare off the Iowa developers by giving the governor and Legislature power to respond to such border threats.
Listen, I understand your revenue concerns, but they are silly. One wonders if you are just doing this to protect video lottery owners. The facts are simple. If a large Casino opens in Larchwood it will supply many quality jobs to residents of Sioux Falls, high-paying, good benefits jobs. These people will live and spend their paychecks in Sioux Falls. Also, people who travel to the Casino from other parts of Iowa, South Dakota and Minnesota will most likely come shopping in Sioux Falls. I think the casino in Iowa would actually boost the economy in Sioux Falls. The losers? Video Lottery casinos on the Eastside of Sioux Falls. Who cares. Boo-Hoo!
Senator Knudson is the only one who got it right;
Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, said the proposed amendment doesn’t limit the types of gambling the governor and lawmakers could create.
“In the end, this will have the effect of locating one mega-casino in Sioux Falls,” Knudson said. He said it likely would also result in development of huge casinos for the state’s reservations.
Of course, now if he can just get a backbone, this might have not passed the Senate.