The No Casino Markham group has collected more than 1,100 signatures calling on the city to end the casino case once and for all.
The group, which consists of local residents, current Councillor Alan Ho, current local public school board trustee Allan Tam and 2014 municipal hopeful Amanda Collucci.
Earlier today, the group came out and denounced a public survey sent out by Regional Councillor Jim Jones asking for feedback from residents about a muti-use entertainment complex, that could include a convention centre, five-star hotel, arena, performing arts centre, retail and restaurant venues and a gaming resort.
“It seems councillors have jumped ship from an arena to a casino,” said group member Alick Siu, who is also the co-chair of the York Region Parent Association.
“Why would a casino be good for our city? I’m puzzled, how can the city promote an active lifestyle, but have a casino at the other end?”
Concerns were raised about the negative impacts of a casino, such as an increase in crime, gambling addiction and family breakups.
“Markham is a vibrant city,” Mr. Ho said. “We don’t need a casino. The negative impacts will be long lasting and felt by the next generation. We are the high-tech capital, we don’t need another name – the casino or gambling capital.”
But the survey was meant to be a conversation starter, said Mr. Jones, who is leading the charge on the survey. Councillors Don Hamilton and Colin Campbell have also loaned their names to the survey, which was sent to about 100,000 homes in Markham.
Mr. Hamilton also include the survey in his spring newsletter for local residents, with the heading ‘Casino for Unionville?’ asking for residents’ opinions.
But the headline is misleading, Mayor Frank Scarpitti said.
“Why would you ask a question like that,” he said. “Do you really have to ask if people want a casino? Why not ask if people want a garbage dump in Unionville.”
Unionville encompasses both the heritage village and the new Markham Centre and land in between.
“I thought it was made clear last year, a casino is not a priority for the city,” Mr. Scarpitti said. “Our priority is to attract investment and jobs. I don’t think a company such as Aviva would be thrilled if a casino moved into their neighbourhood.”
“When was I supposed to put out this survey? In January after the election?” said Mr. Jones, who is also seeking re-election this year. “I’m not saying approve the casino. I’m saying, should we look into this?”
And it’s only the residents who can decide if the casino case should be re-opened and considered by council.
In the survey, Mr. Jones called the exercise a ‘city building’ opportunity and said he will only pursue the entertainment complex, in which a casino-type resort would account for 5 to 7 per cent of the entire square footage, if it were privately funded.
The purpose of the survey is not to approve or reject a casino, Mr. Hamilton said. Rather, the hope is to gather public opinion and gage if residents want the issue considered in detail.
“We’re just asking residents if we should look at it or no don’t look at it,” Mr. Hamilton said. “If it’s brought back, that doesn’t mean a casino for sure. This is just the beginning of the process. Something that wasn’t done with the arena.”
The idea for the casino has been floated before with downtown Markham and Langstaff areas being listed as possible locations. But the city first needs to see if there is an appetite for that kind of development, Mr. Hamilton said.
And having the survey come out now makes it an election issue worth debating, he added.
While the municipal election on the horizon, the timing of the survey. which is not a city initiative, is questionable since the city is trying to attract a university campus, Mr. Scarpitti said.
“This is a political football,” he said. “The timing is horrible. We’re working to bring York University to the city. Not many corporations would appreciate establishing a casino in their vicinity. I can tell you, a university definitely would not.”
There are numerous issues to consider, including potential revenue for the city, compared to the potential increase in crime, gambling addition, prostitution and its impact on social services.
“In the 2010 election, the arena was not on anyone’s lips,” Mr. Hamilton said. “All of a sudden there were plans to build an arena. Let’s put this out there ahead of time and make it an election issue.”
But council has looked at this twice before, in the spring of 2013 and in the fall of 2012.
In March 2013, the Ontario Gaming Corp. put forward a list of 29 potential gaming zones for a new casino, which included Markham, Richmond Hill, Vaughan, Mississauga and Toronto.
The idea of a casino was voted down by Vaughan last fall and was rejected by Richmond Hill in 2012.
Last spring, Markham council voted 9-4 against against the idea.
In June 2012, Markham council voted 7-6 not to delve any further into the OLG casino project.
But in both cases, the public was not consulted, Mr. Jones said, which is why he sent out the recent survey.
“When you are creating a vision, you go to the people first,” he said. “Creating a vision is supposed to be an open process. You put everything in the comprehensive vision. You don’t create a vision building by building.”
But there are many questions left unanswered about the survey the No Casino in Markham group is concerned about, including who is behind the survey and who paid for it, Ms Yeung Collucci said.
Mr. Jones plans to make the survey results public after the survey closes at the end of this month.
Meanwhile, the No Casino Markham group plans to continue to get signatures and to pass the signed petition along to Markham council as well as the provincial government.
“We will not stop until (Mr.) Jones stops the casino project,” Ms Yeung Collucci said.
