Count me among those who have yet to hear a compelling argument against approving a third casino in Baton Rouge.
Believe me, I’ve tried to justify voting against Pinnacle’s desire to build a casino and entertainment complex but I can’t. My love of the free market won’t allow it—not to mention a hunk, a hunk of burning desire to see a cosmetically held together Wayne Newton singing “Danke Schöen” in our growing metropolis.
Seriously, if Philadelphia, Miss., can land the third plastic wonder of the world [Phyllis Diller and Joan Rivers are one and two] why can’t we?
So unless you live in Bluebonnet Highlands or University Club and have a problem with Pinnacle becoming your neighbor—or you work for the Belle of Baton Rouge or Hollywood casinos—what legitimate reason is there not to vote Feb. 9 in favor of Pinnacle?
The daily newspaper is against Pinnacle coming to town, saying it’s an expansion of gambling and our time would be better served attracting “true opportunities for real economic growth, such as development of stable, lasting, technology-based businesses.”
I couldn’t agree more with that last statement, but exactly how have our economic development efforts been sidetracked by the Pinnacle debate? Do you think BRAC’s biggest economic development victory is a call center because of Pinnacle? Really? Gee, I thought it might have something to do with our pathetic public education system, inadequate state funding of both LSU and Pennington Biomedical, growing crime and poverty figures and a Legislature that believes a knowledge-based economy means learning how to skirt ethics laws without getting caught.
If the referendum were to abolish casinos in Baton Rouge then I’d be all over that in support, but as long as we’ve got ‘em I say let them all sit at the blackjack table and let the free market decide who goes bust.
Speaking of competition, of the millions and millions of dollars spent on propaganda ads by both sides the best, by far, is the anti-Pinnacle ad decrying the expansion of gambling. The two existing casinos paid for it. That’s like the head of the Gambino Family, worried about a rival moving onto their turf, complaining about the spread of organized crime.
As for the traffic argument the competition has raised—puh-lease, since when have we ever allowed traffic concerns to halt development in this town? And if traffic caused by Pinnacle becomes as bad as advertised then that’s bad news for the downtown casinos because neither has ever created a traffic problem.
Now, my friend Loren Scott, the noted economist and the pride of Wink, Texas, argues the free market doesn’t apply here because gaming is a state-regulated industry, capped at 15 casinos with no more than six allowed in a single parish. And, in truth, he’s quite correct, but I still say that if Baton Rouge is a two-casino town, as Scott asserts, then let the principles of a competitive free market determine which two survive.
Isn’t it funny that both the Belle and Hollywood casinos either announce upgrades or expansion plans the minute Pinnacle arrived on the scene?
But, hey, if you’re not buying the free market thing, then let’s go Survivor on the matter, putting all three casinos on the ballot and letting the voters cast one off the island. I say send Columbia Sussex Corp., the fools who run the Belle, packing.
I’m voting for Pinnacle not because it’s economic development, not because of whatever jobs the casino creates and not because of the additional revenue the parish potentially gains. No, I’m voting “yes” simply because I like their plans better than what the two existing casinos are delivering.
That said, Mayor Kip Holden and the Metro Council should not allow Pinnacle to break ground on its casino and hotel until the company provides a detailed timeline on when it will build the non-gambling portion of its entertainment mecca. Set hard dates and punish Pinnacle financially if it fails to meet the deadlines.
Pinnacle is fond of saying it “underpromises and overdelivers.” How wonderful for them. I say, “Put your money where your slogan is.”
Comments
Posted by bontemps on January 29, 2008 at 3:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I believe if there are to be 2 and only 2 casino's in Baton Rouge they might as well be downtown. A new casino will do nothing to help that area. I know some will argue that the old boats have not done much since opening up in downtown, but is Pinnacle going to much more? most likely not. Everybody is caught up in this "resort" name they keep giving it. Yepee! they will build a 100 room hotel. There are Motel 6's along 1-10/12 that have more rooms than that. Remember people are going to vote for "Phase 1" of this project ONLY. They do not have to commit to doing any more and if they are like 95% of casino companies, they won't.
I think the issue should be more about the revitalization of the downtown area, and I do think that is a concern. Remember, there would be no Sheraton Hotel or Atrium if not for the casino's. If they do little, at least it's something, and not located next to several subdivisions outside of a heavy commercial area.
P.S. No, I don't live in the area near the proposed Pinnacle casino.
Posted by backyardhell on January 30, 2008 at 8:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How about what it will do to traffic on an already overburdened Bluebonnet? It is the closest exit to the site off I-10 and with the Mall, Perkins Rowe and Willow Grove, it's already doing quadruple duty.
I'm not against the casino per se, but boy could they have picked much worse of a location?
Posted by backyardhell on January 30, 2008 at 8:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How about what it will do to traffic on an already overburdened Bluebonnet? It is the closest exit to the site off I-10 and with the Mall, Perkins Rowe and Willow Grove, it's already doing quadruple duty.
I'm not against the casino per se, but boy could they have picked much worse of a location?
For a city trying to revitalize downtown, there sure is a whole lot of effort to develop as far away from downtown as possible.
Posted by jklemoine on January 31, 2008 at 3:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Your proximity to any proposed development is not a qualifier on whether or not your opinion counts. I live in downtown and have very strong feelings about development all over East Baton Rouge Parish and the entire state for that matter.
My objection to the Pinnacle project is that it is poor growth. Allowing the project because of the potential entertainment value or possible tax revenues it generates will be widely offset by the eventual shuttering of at least one of the downtown casinos. Building something that would be so much of a "regional draw" as they expect it to be, will only add undue burden on parts of the city that are completely unprepared.
I couldn't care less how it affects the neighbors, but I just believe that if the casino is built it will just create more of the typical sprawl crap that already covers most of ascension and livingston parishes.
Posted by gmo on February 1, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'd like to reply to your endorsement of the Pinnacle concept which is to be voted on Feb 9th.
1) I am not rabidly anti-gambling. I am almost neutral, leaning slightly on the anti- side. But, there is no way I could vote in favor of Pinnacle. Here's why:
2) Over the years I visited the boats two or three times, curiosity and free beer. Each time I was met by a wave of cigarette smoke and a thick wall of jangling bells. Once, I witnessed an old woman in her bathrobe over a nightgown, slippers on, sitting in a wheel chair with a bowl of silver dollars (or equivalent chips...not familiar with the set up), putting those dollars without pause into a slot machine. She didn't even wait for the numbers (or fruit?) to appear before putting her next dollar in. Her facial expression was serious and joyless. I don't know if she had a gambling problem or not, but from that moment on I had one. That depressing sight...plus the noise and the cigarette smoke...is why I will vote against Pinnacle. This is strictly personal, nothing to do with the objections listed on your website.
The Business Report must support profitable business ventures. That's why you exist. Capitalism. I rather like Bill Gate's version of capitalism. I kinda think he would consider the depressing image I saw and the unhealthy pollution I experienced as reason to back off Pinnacle.
gmo
Posted by sunshine on February 1, 2008 at 12:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lest I be stoned by my new neighbors in Lexington Estates (next to U-Club), my husband and I say Right On J.R! Our first question was will they have a shuttle to the neighborhood so that we don't have to worry about driving home after a night of entertainment? Some people like to gamble. It's fun, it's a leisure activity and it's usually a safer bet that you'll be entertained at a casino over a local movie theater for arguably the same amount of money. Unfortunately, if you live in Baton Rouge, your choice is the dump or the other dump that are lined with octogenarians hauling oxygen tanks and chain smoking in front of nickel slots. We need something better, something nicer, something that reminds us of Vegas so that we spend our money here at home instead of taking off to Nevada or even New Orleans. Pinnacle’s new resort won’t even be in the same league as the other two casinos, no matter how much money they spend to upgrade. It’s like going to the Horseshoe over the Wynn in Vegas, there simply is no comparison. We might actually get a Cirque du Soleil show traveling through Baton Rouge with a world-class entertainment venue doing the bidding. And traffic created by a casino? Unless there’s a show, casinos don’t have mass amounts of traffic at one time, it’s more of a steady flow. We’re not talking rush-hour impacts either, unless rush hour suddenly moved to 2AM. Heck, this casino will probably have less of an impact than any new construction in town considering that most casinos are open 24 hours a day which means there is seldom a single time when folks are coming and going all at once. Let’s vote no to mediocrity in Baton Rouge and at least give a resort like this a chance.
Posted by scapaflow on February 1, 2008 at 1:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
JR, was very disappointed to see your editorial in favor of Pinnacle. The answer is we need less gambling, not more. That is the end of the story! For you to say that if the referendum were to abolish gambling then you would be all for it is a little disturbing. Well, my friend, you can't have it both ways. You are either for gambling or against it. If you are looking for a compelling argument against approving Pinnacle then all you need to do is think about why you would be for abolishing gambling. It's right there in front of you! When you discuss reasons why we have trouble recruiting other types of business to our city you state 'gee, I thought it might have something to do with our pathetic public education system, inadequate state funding of both LSU and Pennington Biomedical, growing crime and poverty figures'. If you think back in time just a little bit I think you will recall that those are the things that gambling was supposed to cure...and it obviously hasn't. How in the hell can it improve poverty when it takes the most from those who have the least. Hasn't done a damn things to improve our traffic or our streets either. But it has fattened the wallets of out-of-town casino owners. Yes JR, you have the compelling reason...you stated it well...you just refuse to hear it!
Posted by o_me_o_my on February 1, 2008 at 2:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why is it that every time a casino is mentioned someone has to describe the "lifeless" people that are seen at the slot machines? Ever walked into a neighborhood bar filled with alcoholics that are there from morning to night, or what about those that lose all their money shopping on QVC or at the mall? No one brings this up when a new bar opens, or when the Mall of LA came to town. I only hear this argument when it has something to do with gambling. This is not good enough for me.
By the way, I don't enjoy gambling, and never have. I visit a casino about once or twice a year. I lose about $20-40 and then get upset because it was a waste of time and money. However, I like visiting the resort/destination casinos just to do something different. There's always a concert I can attend, a spa I can relax in, a good meal to eat, etc.
And if you don't trust Pinnacle because every other gaming company overpromises, just look at L'Auberge du Lac in Lake Charles. I think what they did with that property speaks for itself.
On another note, nothing would make me happier than seeing Columbia Sussex Corporation out of Louisiana. I don't know how their acquisition of the Belle was passed by the gaming board, but it's high time for them to set sail. I'd be willing to bet anything (yes, I'll wager on this one) that Pinnacle wouldn't run their property nearly as poorly as those idiots at Columbia Sussex Corporation.
Posted by Diva on February 1, 2008 at 2:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
JR, I usually agree with you (Rouzan, downtown Library), but this time you called it wrong, and you got it backwards. Why not vote AGAINST it because you haven't heard a compelling argument in FAVOR of it?
I'm no fan of casinos, and never visit the two we have now, but I can't see why "competition" even enters into this argument. Competition is an appropriate argument when the issue is consumer goods and services, not another place for people to lose their money. The few times I've wanted to see a show (Cirque du Soleil, for example), I didn't mind traveling to Biloxi or Marksville. I didn't feel deprived that we don't have a Las Vegas-type venue here. The River Center works well enough.
The casinos draw primarily from the local community. There's just no reason to allow such a huge monstrosity to plant itself in an area where it's just going to draw from the same pool of people who frequent the two existing casinos.
Here's something else to think about. The River Road is a rural, agricultural area, rich in history (even the bad history of slavery). Bicyclists enjoy riding along that historic stretch of road for miles and miles. Pinnacle will be an obstacle and present additional dangers to those on bikes. The Audubon Society correctly pointed out that various bird species will be affected by such a development. We don't need to be expanding development into rural areas and animal habitat; we should be using infill. Pinnacle should buy out the Belle and upgrade it. We should be keeping gambling in the downtown area, where it is more appropriate anyway, in terms of its surroundings.
The way Pinnacle has maneuvered and manipulated this ballot initiative has also turned me off. I'll vote no on February 9th and hope enough other people in Baton Rouge will do the same.
Posted by SFLA_theville on February 1, 2008 at 2:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am a poker player from the hill country north of here. I cannot wait until I can drive straight on past those "casinos" to play Hold Em and eat a fantastic meal at a real CASINO in Baton Rouge...because that town doesn't have anything to be less than ashamed about in those two boats downtown. I'm sure even you people who despise gambling have seen the meteoric explosion in Poker. Despite the fact that this town is a part of Poker's history from its beginnings in the 1800s on the Mississippi River, WE ONLY HAVE LESS THAN FIVE LEGAL POKER TABLES IN THE PARISH!!!! One of the casinos doesn't even have live poker. That is insane. Some of the best poker players in the WORLD live here. A former Louisiana Governor, one that is not in jail, is among that number. I love all you hoighty toighty super-white people in south baton rouge talking down your noses about "gaming" ... I have seen you in Vegas and the Beau Rivage. Stop acting like you should get to decide what us hoi polloi get to do with our spare time and money. Yes, I can afford it you jerk. Last, but not least, hasn't columbia-sussex proven themselves to be one of the worst corporate partners in br's recent history? I can't believe some of the good people against pinnacle aligned themselves with that crew. Yuck. A6 ran a good program. Sure, I like their outcome...but, either way, it was a good process. Vote for COMPETITION, people...that is always always always a good thing for the public. If you aint learned that yet, you aint ever had Edwin Edwards as your governor.
Posted by scapaflow on February 1, 2008 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well I'll be damn! SFLA has made me see the light! We should have more poker tables for some of the best poker players in the world. I wonder why they are not in Vegas...they certainly should be able to afford to go. I'll be willing to bet (oops) that Buddy Roemer (I'm sure that's the former governor he is referring to) will never sit down at a poker table at any casino in BR...no matter how nice. How would you like to see the CEO of your bank playing poker in public? And yes, we are part of poker history. And gambling history too...I'll bet (sorry) Edwin wishes he wasn't part of that history! BTW, I'm not anti-gambling...Vegas is a great place to go. It's just ruined too many lives here in BR!
Posted by rational on February 1, 2008 at 9 p.m. (Suggest removal)
JR I am amazed! I never expected you to be rational. This is a rare occasion were we are actually in agreement! I fully expected you to be against Pinnacle for the simple reason that it was not Downtown.
Honestly, I do not understand what the opposition to the resort is other than the competition to existing boats. I had been thinking that the "so called progressive" downtowners were the driving forces behind the opposition but now that you are in favor of Pinnacle I don't know what to think!
I really do agree with your current position but you better be careful some one might want to build the main library across the street from Pinnacle. After all the Resort may need a "living room library" rather than a functional main library.
Sorry for the sarcasm but I could not resist!
I think the funniest thing that the opposition is saying is that the resort will take the habitat of the "painted bunting". That is really is going to far. Is university Club take the nesting grounds away too?
Posted by Philip on February 3, 2008 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks J.R., for another brilliant disquisition. Don't be discouraged by the soothsayers who scorn your insight into this mighty conundrum. You have cut the Gordian Knot as clean as a butcher on ground hog day. As to the illusion that the banks of "Ole Man River" is hallowed ground and deserves santified disuse, advocates of that illusion have missed the boat. Fear not, history is on your side. If the river bank was returned to the Bayou Goula Indians, the first thing they would do is build a casino, just like all the other indian tribes in Louisiana want to do. And don't forget Mark Twain. He favored the destruction of the Old State Capitol, not because it was ugly but it reminded him of the houses of the rich landgrabbers of medieval suburbia. Mark liked to smoke cigars, cuss, and ride on riverboats. Good grief, even a graduate of our local high schools could figure out that he would rather use the area for a gentleman's pleasures than kids sliding down the leveee on cardboard boxes. And don't forget that before he was a famous writer he visited sixth century England and turned Camelot and Greater London into an entrepreneur's paradise that even Tom Edison would have been proud of. It is true that "Fast Eddie" (or is it "Slick Eddie"?) was bewitched by the card tables and was thrown in jail for not paying his gambling debts. (One strike against your otherwise perfect argument.) But even the ole Kingfish (our greatest hero) was not above a little hanky-panky now and then. I read in a book that he would only drink soda pop instead of beer, but when he got elected he had an affair with a roler skate queen in Chicago. I doubt he would see much difference between chasing a roller skate and trying his luck on a rouette wheel. As for Phyliss Diller, if she doesn't make it to the new casino don't get depressed. There's a whole gang of comedians in town that can take her place. (P.S. If she does come to town, please let me know. Maybe we could get a discount if we bought our tickets together.)
Posted by richyb on February 4, 2008 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I understand where JR is coming from. Ain't it funny the other two boats only begin to make improvements after hearing of new competition. But still an easy choice for me.
Since I don't gamble anyway; I'm voting "NO" for a few reasons: The pathetic choice for location(BTW I live opposite side of EBR).If it were Downtown(or just South of I-10 Bridge)I might would reconsider.
Pinnacle flaunts itself on TV-commercials with it's gleaming high-rise hotel in Lake Charles while Baton Rouge get's a "micro"-hotel. "Apple's to Raisins". The 750-rooms became 400-rooms down to this(100)?? In Shreveport-Bossier City all 5 (or more?) casino's are ALL within eye-viewing distance from each other. You can thank Texas for those gleaming hotel towers too! No body from Texas is coming to suburbia BR to a golf/corse...so called resort that may never be built supposedly in Phase II??
Posted by dmccay on February 6, 2008 at 8:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
J.R., I usually agree with you, but you are dead wrong in this case. I'm not against this because I'm against the expansion of "evil gambling"- I couldn't care less about that. I am, however, an ardent supporter of downtown (I had previously assumed, incorrectly, it now seems, that you J.R., were also a downtown supporter). Especially with the opening of the Hilton Capital House Hotel, we finally have some life returning to downtown. Unfortunately, there are still almost no places open on Sundays downtown. The existing casinos, particularly the Belle, provide one of the few opportunities for hotel guests to find something to do or eat on Sundays. By voting no to Pinnacle's lame, underwhelming little third-tier "resort," I can help ensure that folks staying in our downtown hotels will continue to have at least some dining/nightlife opportunities on Sundays.
Posted by Dot on February 9, 2008 at 1:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Unkay, JR. I'll check my resume for eligibility & will be first in line to apply for a Pinnacle "LLLLLady" position ...
https://www.hrapply.com/pnkinc/AppJobVie...
(cut to music)
Bair-dair-dair-dair-dair-darint ...
Chick-a-chick-a-ahhhh!!!
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)