I lived in a state that allowed riverboat gambling casinos. We
lived in a small family-friendly town that added a riverboat.
Dear Editor,
I lived in a state that allowed riverboat gambling casinos. We lived in a small family-friendly town that added a riverboat.
The businesses in our little town were promised the same thing that Mr. Ramos promised in his press release as quoted by the Free Lance. He said that the casino “will bring tourists to Hollister’s shops and restaurants,” and “will encourage development.” That was not the case in our former state. The casino brought gamblers.
The gamblers and other town members did not eat as much at the local restaurants – they could get a cheaper and better meal, along with entertainment, at the casino. The casino became the total destination.
Essentially, in our small town, restaurants downtown closed within months of the opening of the riverboat casino. They could not compete. Motels closed shortly thereafter – small conventions would rather be at the luxury hotel at the casino for far less cost.
The casino affected other businesses also. The antique shops in our town, always a tough business to run, closed. Many other businesses in town closed and moved. We watched the regular business customers avoid the riverboat area, not wanting to fight the casino traffic. The effect of a casino near Hollister would be devastating to our already beleaguered business community in Hollister.
There is another reason businesses did poorly. Surveys were run about who gambled at the riverboat. The average people who visited the casino were not the rich – but the poor. Simply, there are just so many dollars one can spend on non-essentials, and gambling soaked up those dollars, leaving less for the other businesses in town.
Al Martinez said, according to the Free Lance, that the proposed casino’s new location closer to downtown Hollister is better than the previous site. If the experience of my former town is any indication, Mr. Martinez is not correct – the closer to the casino, the more likely a business will have problems.
The businesses that will benefit from the casino being near Hollister are all located in Salinas and Gilroy. He also indicated that he doubted that the casino would benefit the local economy. In this he is totally correct – it will devastate local business. Martinez is totally correct when he says that “all casinos want to keep people on site, and that’s why they furnish lodging, food, etc.” I will assure him, however, that when people get done with gambling at 3 in the morning, they are not going to drive into Hollister to look at the town.
The casino near Hollister is a bad idea. Over two-thirds of our residents oppose it, and only 24 percent want it. Let’s kill this idea before our community suffers.
Mel Tungate, Hollister
