| Sign up | Log in | Forgot Password |
A bad day for casinos
By Ed Goppelt
Thursday, 01/24/08
(1201233484787)
Both casinos proposed for Philadelphia suffered setbacks today in a
sign that the days of City officials’ rubber stamping any request from
casino developers are over.
City Councilman Frank DiCicco had legislation introduced this morning that requires the Foxwoods Casino to meet eight conditions before it receives the zoning it needs to build its casino. And Mayor Michael Nutter announced this afternoon that the City had revoked the SugarHouse Casino’s license to build its slots parlor on 12 acres of state-owned riverfront land.
A notice of revocation sent to SugarHouse stated “the issuance of the license is against the public interest,” because it was issued by “City officials who served at the pleasure of an appointing authority whose term of office was about to expire.” Former Commerce Director Stephanie Naidoff issued the license following a raucous public hearing in mid-November. View documents related to the license and hearing.
The notice listed six errors including that the City Commerce Director should have considered whether a casino is an acceptable use for riverfront land, but did not and that the plans SugarHouse submitted to the City were not the same as those approved by the state Gaming Board. SugarHouse has 30 days to appeal the license revocation.
The city’s action today could lead to SugarHouse losing a far more important license, namely its Gaming License issued by the state Gaming Board. The Daily News reported in mid January that Gaming Board Chair Mary Colins said “a loss of riparian rights would put a hold on the license because the casino’s approved land included that land.”
In a related matter, the City asked the Supreme Court today to dismiss a law suit by State legislators Nutter announced. State Senator Vincent Fumo, State Rep. Mike O’Brien and others had sued the City in late December arguing that only state legislature had the authority to regulate the use of state riverfront land. Fumo quickly issued a press release thanking the Mayor. "We are heartened that the city found our legal objections persuasive, and has decided to rescind the Commerce Dept.'s licensing action," Fumo wrote.
According to Mayor Nutter, SugarHouse’s zoning permit will not be revoked even though the casino no longer has site control because the state Supreme Court gave its permission to issue the zoning permit.
DiCicco’s zoning bill requires that Foxwoods receive a CED designation for its property at Reed and Columbus in South Philly only after independent experts have certified that the casino will not adversely affect the neighborhood’s quality of life. Traffic must be better than it is now on Columbus Blvd.; proof must be offered that the casino will not cannabilize local businesses and that the storm water management system is adequate to handle the casino without flooding among other things.
DiCicco says he introduced his legislation laying down a casino district (CED) for Foxwoods because “I have heard and have heeded the Supreme Court’s opinion of Council’s failure to act on gaming matters.” The Supreme Court recently ordered that a casino district for SugarHouse be “deemed” approved because it found that, after four months, Council had failed to take timely action on SugarHouse’s request for a casino district for its site in Fishtown.
Neighborhood leaders, who only learned of DiCicco’s plan to introduce zoning for Foxwoods last night, said they felt betrayed by DiCicco. “I was completely floored that he did this without consulting the community,” Rosanne Loesch told reporters.
Loesch, a board member of Society Hill Civic Association, also expressed anger that DiCicco was not present when his Foxwoods zoning bills were introduced: “If he was sincere, he would have been here today.”
DiCicco’s aide Brian Abernathy said his boss’ absence had nothing to do with avoiding residents angry at having been left out of the loop. DiCicco had to move quickly so that Council’s action on the casino could be included in the City’s brief, due tomorrow, in the Foxwoods zoning case Abernathy said.
In early January, Foxwoods asked the Supreme Court to intervene and grant it zoning after no member of City Council would introduce the necessary legislation over a period of five months. “We thought it important to move forward and have proof of City Council moving in order to address the Foxwoods’ claims,” said Abernathy.