![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldThe first Torontoist post I'd like to point people to is Hamutal Dotan's "Executive Committee Recommends Aggressive Casino Expansion". Therein, with links, Dotan summarizes the sweeping pro-casino recommendations of the executive committee of Toronto's city government (the cabinet analogue, very roughly speaking).
Writing today, Daren Foster argues in "Why Mayor Rob Ford’s Casino Victory is No Victory At All" that the details of Ford's victory suggest that he's actually quite weak, that the casino isn't likely to pass full city council, and that Ford isn't a good mayor.
Support a casino downtown or at Exhibition Place. This is the one everyone expected, based on the mayor’s strong support for a casino.
Support the expansion of the current gambling facility at Woodbine. Also expected, this is much less controversial than a downtown casino—in part because a gaming facility is already there, and in part because the surrounding area isn’t as densely built up. Moreover, many recognize that casino expansion in the Greater Toronto Area, combined with changes to the horse-racing industry, endanger the viability of Woodbine and risk major job losses; allowing expansion is a way of trying to protect the existing site.
Allow Ontario Place to be included as part of a casino development. Moved by the mayor, this motion was unexpected. It goes beyond the locations that we have been discussing thus far, expanding the scope of a potential Exhibition Place casino to also include development at Ontario Place.
Discuss the possibility of “consolidating the Metro Toronto Convention Centre and the Direct Energy Centre into a single, world-class exhibit and convention facility.” Nobody, frankly, knows what this means. It’s another motion moved by Rob Ford, and it appears to be in response to City staff’s finding that the biggest limit on the convention business in Toronto is that our existing facilities aren’t large enough to accommodate the biggest conventions. That’s why many people have suggested that a casino complex include a massive new convention facility, or that existing facilities be expanded. Ford’s motion, however, tries to join up the MTCC, which is located just south of Front Street by the CN Tower, and the Direct Energy Centre, which is at Exhibition Place. Given how far apart those two facilities are, it’s not at all clear what Ford had in mind when he suggested they be consolidated.
Include the Port Lands among the list of potential casino locations. Another surprise, this one goes directly against City staff advice. From their final report on a potential casino: “The vision for the Port Lands is for a live-work community developed with a compact urban form serviced by a network of fine-grained public streets, and parks and open spaces. A large, integrated resort complex would be inconsistent with the emerging vision for the Port Lands.” The executive committee considered, and rejected, a motion that would exclude the Port Lands from any future casino development.
Writing today, Daren Foster argues in "Why Mayor Rob Ford’s Casino Victory is No Victory At All" that the details of Ford's victory suggest that he's actually quite weak, that the casino isn't likely to pass full city council, and that Ford isn't a good mayor.
The real surprise at Tuesday’s meeting wasn’t that Mayor Ford won the vote, meaning the casino debate will move on to city council next month; it was that he had to struggle at all to ensure that he won. This wasn’t just some regular monthly executive committee meeting where there were disagreements between members over a parks-and-environment item. It was a special meeting called by the mayor to deal with one item and one item only. Casinos.
That only nine of the 13 members voted in the affirmative almost guarantees the item’s defeat at council.
[. . .]
If the mayor doesn’t pull something out of a hat to entice councillors over to his side, if he can’t build momentum in favour of a casino, his votes will evaporate. No councillor will want to be on the losing side of such a divisive issue.
Every way you look at this, the council casino vote seems DOA. To most politicians, near-certain defeat on a cherished item would be cause for concern. But as we all know by now, Mayor Ford is not most politicians.
None of this is about good governance or even rational political maneuvering. Losing council votes is a viable strategy if you’re looking to embrace a certain us-versus-them martyrdom. The mayor simply needs a wedge issue to take into next year’s campaign. He’s currently trotting some out to see how they fit. Transit. Island airport jet expansion. They have nice left-right, downtown-suburban dynamics.
The problem with casinos is that the votes won’t fall that way. There’s no ideological or geographic split on the issue. Tuesday’s vote at Executive Committee showed that. The outcome suggests this will just be another millstone for Mayor Ford to wear, further proof that he is unwilling or unable to lead this city.
