Lansing reluctant to back Cal City casino

Font Size:

BY GREGORY TEJEDA
Times correspondent | Wednesday, November 12, 2008 | (8 comment(s))

LANSING | The Village Board is not enthused with Calumet City's quest to build a casino complex along the border between the two towns, and wants assurances that its neighbor would help cover additional public safety expenses a casino would bring.

Village officials on Tuesday discussed the issue, and said they likely would pass a resolution some time in December saying they approve the idea that Calumet City will share some of a casino's proceeds with surrounding towns.

But Mayor Dan Podgorski said there's no way Lansing will endorse the idea of building a casino in Calumet City. "It will be a pretty clear statement that we do not support a casino," he said.

The resolution is being considered because Calumet City is asking governments in the surrounding towns to take an official stance on the idea of a riverboat casino in the Little Calumet River south and west of the River Oaks Shopping Center.

That location literally would put a boat on Lansing's northern border.

Podgorski said Lansing likely would be affected the most of any town, since he suspects Interstate 80 and Torrence Avenue would be the most popular roads used by people throughout the south suburbs who decide to patronize a Calumet City casino.

He also expects Lansing's police and fire departments would be called upon to assist Calumet City officials in terms of maintaining safety at a casino and the surrounding area.

"This is going to have a direct impact on our costs," the mayor said.

Podgorski said he would want a Calumet City casino resolution to resemble the measure the village board passed in 2004 when Lynwood officials considered a partnership with an American Indian tribe to build a land-based casino in that town just south of Lansing.

That resolution merely said Lansing would expect reimbursement for its public safety expenses.

Agreeing with such a sentiment was trustee Norm Abbott. "I don't support building a gambling casino there, and I don't want us approving anything that supports it," he said.

Trustee Bob Ryan had one concern about Podgorski's proposed resolution -- it would not specify how much money Lansing would receive from Calumet City, which could mean the amount could turn out to be an insignificant figure.

"They never offer us figures of how much they'll give us," Ryan said. "I'm very skeptical that we would get anything."

Calumet City is one of three south suburban towns, along with Harvey and Country Club Hills, vying for the 10th casino license that currently is unfilled. Those three are among seven locations across the Chicago area that would like to have the new casino built within their boundaries.

Back to story 8 comment(s)

Please note: Comments from readers will be screened and may not be posted immediately. If you don't see your comment perhaps:

It wasn't clear, concise or focused on the topic in the story.
It was a personal attack, vulgar, explicit or degrading, used actual or implied profanity or contained potentially libelous statements.
It accused someone of being guilty of a crime.
It promoted violence or illegal acts.
It contained telephone numbers or street addresses, or e-mail addresses and links to Web sites other than nwi.com or government agencies.

In no way do these comments represent the views of The Times or Lee Enterprises.

Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude and profane language and personal abuse are not welcome.

Reader comments will not be edited - they will be approved or declined. They may be used in the print edition of the newspaper.

If you feel a posted comment has violated these guidelines, please email our New Media team the commenter's name, the comment and a link to the article.

For more information please read our Terms of Service.

Naysayers Naysayers wrote on Nov 12, 2008 3:02 PM:

" Why must people still be so blind not to see that the casinos are already here and there will be no negative impact as far as disposable income. If they gamble they are already doing so making millions for Indiana not Illinois. How stupid do you have to be not to realize this is a no brainer plus with the creation of thousands of jobs. Hello? Forget about Genovas record that has nothing to do with any of this. Lets check the record of those officials opposing this. They have been against many economic development projects over time. Take a look around see what that attitude has gotten anyone. It is too bad they don't want to share in the revenue. They can say that because no matter what they are going to get it anyway it is part of the agreement. They can play that fence and game with the public. If they really mean it, when the checks get cut will they just return the money back to calumet city, I doubt it. "

JIT wrote on Nov 12, 2008 2:38 PM:

" Any Illinois casino is doomed because of the state-wide smoking ban "

Bobby wrote on Nov 12, 2008 1:59 PM:

" I'm curious why so many are opposed to the casino. Is there good evidence that they are a net loss for communities?

I don't know. I'm open to be convinced one way or the other, but my first thought is that it could be good for Cal City and Lansing. (I live in Lansing.)

Are people actually opposed because of their moral beliefs, or are they concerned for more practical reasons? I'm sure most would say it's for practical reasons, but I would guess most of the time it's more because of moral objections. You're allowed to have those objections, of course. I'm just curious if that's the main reason. "

Bob wrote on Nov 12, 2008 1:34 PM:

" The smoking ban is hurting all the other casinos in Illinois. Why would this one be different with Indiana casinos just minutes away? Atlantic City had to repeal its smoking ban. "

Dumb idea wrote on Nov 12, 2008 1:23 PM:

" Cal City better reconsider this whole casino idea. The casinos in Gary and East Chicago aren't doing so well since the Horseshoe opened its new expansion. I don't think Horseshoe patrons will be lured away by a casino in Calumet City. "

To Casino Support wrote on Nov 12, 2008 1:15 PM:

" Casino do not help local business. People go to the Casino and then leave. They do not go to local business to spend money. Only business that might be affected is a local PAWN shop. "

Gus K wrote on Nov 12, 2008 1:02 PM:

" We don't need another Casino to suck up the last of any discretionary income. What will be left for local small business... nothing. This was a plan originally cooked up by the corrupt ex-mayor of Calumet City, Gerry Genova. It should have died when he was indicted and sent to Federal prison.

Hopefully Lansing will do the right thing and oppose such unneeded and destructive nonsense. "

Casino Support wrote on Nov 12, 2008 12:41 PM:

" I feel that the increased traffic would affect Lansing and Calumet City however the tax dollar's and increased support of local business would be great for both towns. I think Lansing is just upset that they didn't think of it first. The jobs that the casino would create both within itself and the surrounding communities would be great for the region. "

Back to story 8 comment(s)

Post a comment Once your comments are approved, they will appear here.

Marketplace

Sections

Services

Other Publications

Search