datamouse
Active Member
Looks like council is going through the trouble of reinstating the special meeting next week. Don't see what the point is when it's clearly a dead issue other than to score political points.
|
|
|
- Thread starter spider
- Start date
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Legal reasons.
TOperson
Active Member
It's to formally, officially kill off the whole casino issue. Drive a stake through its heart. Like its a vampire.
datamouse
Active Member
The whole thing has left me jaded. I can't stand hearing that a casino's income will solve funding issues and I can't stand being told that it will destroy the city.
I really don't care either way on a casino; I guess the politicking on both sides has put me off.
I really don't care either way on a casino; I guess the politicking on both sides has put me off.
TOareaFan
Superstar
It would be very interesting to know who reinstated the meeting. If I was a casino opponent on council I think I would be very happy to bring this to a vote next week given the other issues the leader of the pro-casino contingent on council has been dealing with over the past two days. In politics, as in any sport, it is a lot easier to score a victory if the other side does not have their head in the game!
TOperson
Active Member
Layton is the main organizer of the move to hold the meeting, but it's not clear if the other 22 are all casino opponents. Probably most are. Either way, it's not democratic for the vote to be postponed and then cancelled etc on the whims of the Mayor. If the vote doesn't go his way, that's the breaks.
datamouse
Active Member
I agree with the sentiment but since even now the Mayor, who was probably the casino's biggest supporter is declaring it dead, I don't see it as delay tactic as it was with the transit funding vote. Here, I see it has not worthy of a special meeting and it might as well just be postponed to the next regular meeting in June to die.
BurlOak
Senior Member
Whoever it is, probably does not have a good grasp of reality. If the hosting fee is $100M, $500M, $2B would people have a different opinion. It seems they would be debating an intangible item, so it would be imposible to vote on anything meaningful. If the vote is for a specific amount (i.e. 40M), then the vote would be a formality since most would support it, but it would have no bearing on Councils suppport is a new Casino funding formula comes along.
TOperson
Active Member
Nope. A good number of councillors have said they would not support a casino for any amount of $$, and NONE have said they would support one for as little as $40M.
freshcutgrass
Senior Member
That's the problem with the end of civilizations....their causes are rather insidious.
When we have a government that takes the low road and raises the funds necessary to run its business by not only relying on gambling to balance its budget....but decides it needs to promote significantly higher gambling to balance its budget (rather than raising taxes or cutting services), then I think that qualifies as part of that slippery (or maybe not even that noticeably slippery) slope.
It's one thing to have "sin tax" as a way to curb the sin.
It's another thing to start relying on it as revenue rather than a way to curb the "sin".
And it's yet another thing to start promoting more of that "sin" to raise even more revenue.
Well, because you can actually contract salmonella from undercooked eggs, but you can't contract cancer from ETS (2nd hand smoke).
GenerationW
Senior Member
Well I'm sure if you were in charge at least the trains would run on time.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
The Toronto casino and Woodbine expansion killed at Toronto City Council today at 1pm. Next up, Markham? Vaughan? Richmond Hill?
canarob
Senior Member
The Onex proposal is in Markham (no idea where) and Cadillac Fairview's back-up site is in the Buttonville redevelopment lands. Expect to hear something soon.
http://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/2878664-markham-eyes-game-plan-as-t-o-cools-on-casino/
taal
Senior Member
I'm going to guess downtown Markham.
jje1000
Senior Member
The Markham site may work, given Markham's Chinese population.
Anyhow, a whole lot of cowardice from Ford and his crew today, claiming that this was a "victory".
A shame that he didn't even make any effort to push Woodbine as an alternate site.
Anyhow, a whole lot of cowardice from Ford and his crew today, claiming that this was a "victory".
https://twitter.com/towhey/status/336889988564258816Mark Towhey said:
A shame that he didn't even make any effort to push Woodbine as an alternate site.