St. Joseph High School is holding the annual Family Fun Day and raffle beginning at 11 a.m. Saturday, March 1, on the school campus. Features include a food sale, a rummage sale, car wash, entertainment and games.
For more information and off-island purchase of raffle tickets see Source article in Community/Other section.
ST. JOSEPH SCHOOL'S FAMILY FUN DAY MARCH 1
Feb. 26, 2003 — St. Joseph High School is holding the annual Family Fun Day and raffle beginning at 11 a.m. Saturday, March 1, on the school campus. Features include a food sale, a rummage sale, car wash, entertainment and games.
At 3 p.m. the raffle will be featured. For off-island alumni and friends who wish tickets, call (340) 692-2455 or Fax (340) 692-2458 to participate. For those on St. Croix, drop by during the school day to pick up raffle tickets.
St. Joseph High school is located at No. 3 Mt. Pleasant on Route 2, Frederiksted. For more information visit the St. Joseph High School website.
Publisher's note : Like the St. Croix Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
At 3 p.m. the raffle will be featured. For off-island alumni and friends who wish tickets, call (340) 692-2455 or Fax (340) 692-2458 to participate. For those on St. Croix, drop by during the school day to pick up raffle tickets.
St. Joseph High school is located at No. 3 Mt. Pleasant on Route 2, Frederiksted. For more information visit the St. Joseph High School website.
Publisher's note : Like the St. Croix Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
NON-EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO VLT ISSUE IS NEEDED
Dear Source,
It is now patently clear that the issue of whether video lottery terminals should be allowed on St. Thomas has split the Virgin Islands community, with strong opinions on both sides. At a recent "anti-VLT" rally at the Christiansted bandstand, I attempted to introduce the idea of a public forum to debate both sides of this volatile issue. To my utter surprise and disappointment, this suggestion was met with boos and hisses. The upshot of this episode is that I am seen as uninformed on the issue and that my failure to "take a stand" means that I do not value public opinion! Nothing is further from the truth.
As private citizens, we have a right to our opinion and there is no obligation to do fair research. As a public official with the responsibility to make decisions affecting the populace, I believe that more is required before "taking a stand." I strongly believe that my position as an elected official requires that I not only inform myself, but also show to the public that I value input regarding all sides of any issue. This must not be confused with a lack of understanding of the subject matter. When I say that I need to weigh both sides of the issue, it does not mean that I have not read or understood the VLT law. What I value most is a non-emotional approach to such a very divisive issue.
Those who oppose the presence of these gambling devices have been extremely vocal in characterizing them as the "crack cocaine of gambling" and lamenting the detrimental effects on the social fabric of these islands. There are stories of homes lost, families destroyed, even suicides.
The proponents are just as convinced that the VLT's, which currently exist in several mainland states, can bring millions of dollars into the stagnant Virgin Islands economy. For example, VLT's have raked in millions for the government in places like Ohio and Delaware. According to a report in the Cincinnati Enquirer (Wed., July 21, 1999), "Slot machines helped pay off a $89-million debt in 18 months for Iowa's only thoroughbred race track." At a race track in Wilmington, Delaware, VLT's helped boost daily purses from $75,000 in 1995 to $250,000 in 1999."
There is ample evidence to support both sides. However, with the repeal of the existing legislation pending, with the case now being litigated in court, and noting the emotional response of the members of the community who are against introduction of the VLT's, some deliberation and study is in order.
The VLT issue has affected other communities in a similar way. From provinces in Canada to the far reaches of New Jersey, politicians and leaders are faced with the issue of the value of VLT's. It is instructive that the more reasoned leaders are taking the emotion out of the debate by providing forums for discussion of all aspects of the issue.
For example, in Canada, the VLT issue was threatening to split communities sharply down the middle. Some provinces were repealing them as a bad idea while others were interested in installing them. In response, the University of Alberta organized a conference on VLT's and video gaming. The three-day conference, subtitled "Issues and Impacts" brought together speakers representing a wide spectrum of views. The presenters came from diverse backgrounds and included academics, clergy, law-enforcement personnel, local government officials, members of the gambling industry, and even an employee of a company that programs and manufactures video gambling machines and a former blackjack dealer who trains people to work in casinos.
The promoter of the Canada conference stated, "We're seeing that there really are a lot of complex issues involved — even more than we thought. I think that there's a tendency to believe that some of these public policy issues are more simple than they actually are."
Additionally, as recently as last week, the governor of New Jersey, James E. McGreevey, appointed a commission to study the feasibility of VLT's at state-owned racetracks in North Jersey. The commission is charged with examining "the legal, economic and policy issues surrounding video lotteries in order to provide a thorough and extensive review of its implications in the state." The commission comprises New Jersey's attorney general, the chair of its Casino Control Commission, a university president, the executive director of the local AARP, and an assemblyman. With that in mind, my recent suggestion of a public debate/discussion on the issue of video lottery terminals should not come as such a shock and need not be interpreted as waffling or indecision.
It has been said that "leaders should lead." Although this phrase has superficial appeal, it is being used to suggest that I take a stand on a particular issue within a period of time which is determined completely by public sentiment. Let me repeat: As a public official, I value public opinion. Dialogue, research and deliberation are integral elements of a vibrant democracy. Although the rule of majority governs, democracy works better with an educated majority. As a democratically elected public representative, I believe it is my job to assist in that process.
That is why, as a leader, I have a responsibility to do more than follow public opinion. I must also honor the process of dialogue, research and deliberation, in order to avoid the pitfalls attached to rushing to judgment. As a legislator, the effects of any ill-conceived action on my part affect many people directly. Even if, in the end, my decision reflects public opinion, such a decision must be preceded by research rather than emotion. I have several people on staff to assist me; therefore, I should use the resources at my disposal to thoroughly research all issues on which I am expected to cast a vote.
The current state of affairs highlights the need for, and absence of, research and deliberation. It is highly likely that research, dialogue and deliberation might have prevented the current status of the issue. The media reports reflected much confusion regarding the identification and number of machines in the territory, whether they were licensed, the contents of the agreement, and the ramifications of terminating the existing contract. The courts are now being petitioned to resolve the debate. To my knowledge, the opponents of the VLT's have not publicly discussed these very significant aspects of the issue, and have not offered any real solutions.
Public debate on this issue provides an independent public service promoting a forum for informed discussion about the political, economic, and social effects of gambling and VLT's. Some opponents of VLT's and intelligent discussion are masquerading as "leaders" while insulting the intelligence of the populace. They have narrowed the debate to "If you support VLT's, you do not support St. Croix." Although I have stated publicly that I do not support any form of gambling, I do not believe that that is the entire debate. Presentation of any point of view necessarily requires balanced research on all aspects of gambling behavior and effects. Open discussion would involve the exploration of the regulatory, legislative, social, and educational issues relating to gambling.
Those of us who use the media to espouse a particular point of view have a moral responsibility to honor the whole truth, to show respect for differences that exist among us, and embrace a passion for intelligent debate. The current practice of mean-spiritedness and disrespect for a point of view different from one's own simply perpetuates the culture of negativity which is poisoning the community, while simultaneously showing a bad example to our youth.
We have absolutely nothing to lose by educating ourselves on the issues which affect our daily lives. Education is the hallmark of a true and effective democracy.
Ronald E. Russell
St. Croix
It is now patently clear that the issue of whether video lottery terminals should be allowed on St. Thomas has split the Virgin Islands community, with strong opinions on both sides. At a recent "anti-VLT" rally at the Christiansted bandstand, I attempted to introduce the idea of a public forum to debate both sides of this volatile issue. To my utter surprise and disappointment, this suggestion was met with boos and hisses. The upshot of this episode is that I am seen as uninformed on the issue and that my failure to "take a stand" means that I do not value public opinion! Nothing is further from the truth.
As private citizens, we have a right to our opinion and there is no obligation to do fair research. As a public official with the responsibility to make decisions affecting the populace, I believe that more is required before "taking a stand." I strongly believe that my position as an elected official requires that I not only inform myself, but also show to the public that I value input regarding all sides of any issue. This must not be confused with a lack of understanding of the subject matter. When I say that I need to weigh both sides of the issue, it does not mean that I have not read or understood the VLT law. What I value most is a non-emotional approach to such a very divisive issue.
Those who oppose the presence of these gambling devices have been extremely vocal in characterizing them as the "crack cocaine of gambling" and lamenting the detrimental effects on the social fabric of these islands. There are stories of homes lost, families destroyed, even suicides.
The proponents are just as convinced that the VLT's, which currently exist in several mainland states, can bring millions of dollars into the stagnant Virgin Islands economy. For example, VLT's have raked in millions for the government in places like Ohio and Delaware. According to a report in the Cincinnati Enquirer (Wed., July 21, 1999), "Slot machines helped pay off a $89-million debt in 18 months for Iowa's only thoroughbred race track." At a race track in Wilmington, Delaware, VLT's helped boost daily purses from $75,000 in 1995 to $250,000 in 1999."
There is ample evidence to support both sides. However, with the repeal of the existing legislation pending, with the case now being litigated in court, and noting the emotional response of the members of the community who are against introduction of the VLT's, some deliberation and study is in order.
The VLT issue has affected other communities in a similar way. From provinces in Canada to the far reaches of New Jersey, politicians and leaders are faced with the issue of the value of VLT's. It is instructive that the more reasoned leaders are taking the emotion out of the debate by providing forums for discussion of all aspects of the issue.
For example, in Canada, the VLT issue was threatening to split communities sharply down the middle. Some provinces were repealing them as a bad idea while others were interested in installing them. In response, the University of Alberta organized a conference on VLT's and video gaming. The three-day conference, subtitled "Issues and Impacts" brought together speakers representing a wide spectrum of views. The presenters came from diverse backgrounds and included academics, clergy, law-enforcement personnel, local government officials, members of the gambling industry, and even an employee of a company that programs and manufactures video gambling machines and a former blackjack dealer who trains people to work in casinos.
The promoter of the Canada conference stated, "We're seeing that there really are a lot of complex issues involved — even more than we thought. I think that there's a tendency to believe that some of these public policy issues are more simple than they actually are."
Additionally, as recently as last week, the governor of New Jersey, James E. McGreevey, appointed a commission to study the feasibility of VLT's at state-owned racetracks in North Jersey. The commission is charged with examining "the legal, economic and policy issues surrounding video lotteries in order to provide a thorough and extensive review of its implications in the state." The commission comprises New Jersey's attorney general, the chair of its Casino Control Commission, a university president, the executive director of the local AARP, and an assemblyman. With that in mind, my recent suggestion of a public debate/discussion on the issue of video lottery terminals should not come as such a shock and need not be interpreted as waffling or indecision.
It has been said that "leaders should lead." Although this phrase has superficial appeal, it is being used to suggest that I take a stand on a particular issue within a period of time which is determined completely by public sentiment. Let me repeat: As a public official, I value public opinion. Dialogue, research and deliberation are integral elements of a vibrant democracy. Although the rule of majority governs, democracy works better with an educated majority. As a democratically elected public representative, I believe it is my job to assist in that process.
That is why, as a leader, I have a responsibility to do more than follow public opinion. I must also honor the process of dialogue, research and deliberation, in order to avoid the pitfalls attached to rushing to judgment. As a legislator, the effects of any ill-conceived action on my part affect many people directly. Even if, in the end, my decision reflects public opinion, such a decision must be preceded by research rather than emotion. I have several people on staff to assist me; therefore, I should use the resources at my disposal to thoroughly research all issues on which I am expected to cast a vote.
The current state of affairs highlights the need for, and absence of, research and deliberation. It is highly likely that research, dialogue and deliberation might have prevented the current status of the issue. The media reports reflected much confusion regarding the identification and number of machines in the territory, whether they were licensed, the contents of the agreement, and the ramifications of terminating the existing contract. The courts are now being petitioned to resolve the debate. To my knowledge, the opponents of the VLT's have not publicly discussed these very significant aspects of the issue, and have not offered any real solutions.
Public debate on this issue provides an independent public service promoting a forum for informed discussion about the political, economic, and social effects of gambling and VLT's. Some opponents of VLT's and intelligent discussion are masquerading as "leaders" while insulting the intelligence of the populace. They have narrowed the debate to "If you support VLT's, you do not support St. Croix." Although I have stated publicly that I do not support any form of gambling, I do not believe that that is the entire debate. Presentation of any point of view necessarily requires balanced research on all aspects of gambling behavior and effects. Open discussion would involve the exploration of the regulatory, legislative, social, and educational issues relating to gambling.
Those of us who use the media to espouse a particular point of view have a moral responsibility to honor the whole truth, to show respect for differences that exist among us, and embrace a passion for intelligent debate. The current practice of mean-spiritedness and disrespect for a point of view different from one's own simply perpetuates the culture of negativity which is poisoning the community, while simultaneously showing a bad example to our youth.
We have absolutely nothing to lose by educating ourselves on the issues which affect our daily lives. Education is the hallmark of a true and effective democracy.
Ronald E. Russell
St. Croix
Editor's note: We welcome an
d encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.
Publisher's note : Like the St. Croix Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
NON-EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO VLT ISSUE IS NEEDED
Dear Source,
It is now patently clear that the issue of whether video lottery terminals should be allowed on St. Thomas has split the Virgin Islands community, with strong opinions on both sides. At a recent "anti-VLT" rally at the Christiansted bandstand, I attempted to introduce the idea of a public forum to debate both sides of this volatile issue. To my utter surprise and disappointment, this suggestion was met with boos and hisses. The upshot of this episode is that I am seen as uninformed on the issue and that my failure to "take a stand" means that I do not value public opinion! Nothing is further from the truth.
As private citizens, we have a right to our opinion and there is no obligation to do fair research. As a public official with the responsibility to make decisions affecting the populace, I believe that more is required before "taking a stand." I strongly believe that my position as an elected official requires that I not only inform myself, but also show to the public that I value input regarding all sides of any issue. This must not be confused with a lack of understanding of the subject matter. When I say that I need to weigh both sides of the issue, it does not mean that I have not read or understood the VLT law. What I value most is a non-emotional approach to such a very divisive issue.
Those who oppose the presence of these gambling devices have been extremely vocal in characterizing them as the "crack cocaine of gambling" and lamenting the detrimental effects on the social fabric of these islands. There are stories of homes lost, families destroyed, even suicides.
The proponents are just as convinced that the VLT's, which currently exist in several mainland states, can bring millions of dollars into the stagnant Virgin Islands economy. For example, VLT's have raked in millions for the government in places like Ohio and Delaware. According to a report in the Cincinnati Enquirer (Wed., July 21, 1999), "Slot machines helped pay off a $89-million debt in 18 months for Iowa's only thoroughbred race track." At a race track in Wilmington, Delaware, VLT's helped boost daily purses from $75,000 in 1995 to $250,000 in 1999."
There is ample evidence to support both sides. However, with the repeal of the existing legislation pending, with the case now being litigated in court, and noting the emotional response of the members of the community who are against introduction of the VLT's, some deliberation and study is in order.
The VLT issue has affected other communities in a similar way. From provinces in Canada to the far reaches of New Jersey, politicians and leaders are faced with the issue of the value of VLT's. It is instructive that the more reasoned leaders are taking the emotion out of the debate by providing forums for discussion of all aspects of the issue.
For example, in Canada, the VLT issue was threatening to split communities sharply down the middle. Some provinces were repealing them as a bad idea while others were interested in installing them. In response, the University of Alberta organized a conference on VLT's and video gaming. The three-day conference, subtitled "Issues and Impacts" brought together speakers representing a wide spectrum of views. The presenters came from diverse backgrounds and included academics, clergy, law-enforcement personnel, local government officials, members of the gambling industry, and even an employee of a company that programs and manufactures video gambling machines and a former blackjack dealer who trains people to work in casinos.
The promoter of the Canada conference stated, "We're seeing that there really are a lot of complex issues involved — even more than we thought. I think that there's a tendency to believe that some of these public policy issues are more simple than they actually are."
Additionally, as recently as last week, the governor of New Jersey, James E. McGreevey, appointed a commission to study the feasibility of VLT's at state-owned racetracks in North Jersey. The commission is charged with examining "the legal, economic and policy issues surrounding video lotteries in order to provide a thorough and extensive review of its implications in the state." The commission comprises New Jersey's attorney general, the chair of its Casino Control Commission, a university president, the executive director of the local AARP, and an assemblyman. With that in mind, my recent suggestion of a public debate/discussion on the issue of video lottery terminals should not come as such a shock and need not be interpreted as waffling or indecision.
It has been said that "leaders should lead." Although this phrase has superficial appeal, it is being used to suggest that I take a stand on a particular issue within a period of time which is determined completely by public sentiment. Let me repeat: As a public official, I value public opinion. Dialogue, research and deliberation are integral elements of a vibrant democracy. Although the rule of majority governs, democracy works better with an educated majority. As a democratically elected public representative, I believe it is my job to assist in that process.
That is why, as a leader, I have a responsibility to do more than follow public opinion. I must also honor the process of dialogue, research and deliberation, in order to avoid the pitfalls attached to rushing to judgment. As a legislator, the effects of any ill-conceived action on my part affect many people directly. Even if, in the end, my decision reflects public opinion, such a decision must be preceded by research rather than emotion. I have several people on staff to assist me; therefore, I should use the resources at my disposal to thoroughly research all issues on which I am expected to cast a vote.
The current state of affairs highlights the need for, and absence of, research and deliberation. It is highly likely that research, dialogue and deliberation might have prevented the current status of the issue. The media reports reflected much confusion regarding the identification and number of machines in the territory, whether they were licensed, the contents of the agreement, and the ramifications of terminating the existing contract. The courts are now being petitioned to resolve the debate. To my knowledge, the opponents of the VLT's have not publicly discussed these very significant aspects of the issue, and have not offered any real solutions.
Public debate on this issue provides an independent public service promoting a forum for informed discussion about the political, economic, and social effects of gambling and VLT's. Some opponents of VLT's and intelligent discussion are masquerading as "leaders" while insulting the intelligence of the populace. They have narrowed the debate to "If you support VLT's, you do not support St. Croix." Although I have stated publicly that I do not support any form of gambling, I do not believe that that is the entire debate. Presentation of any point of view necessarily requires balanced research on all aspects of gambling behavior and effects. Open discussion would involve the exploration of the regulatory, legislative, social, and educational issues relating to gambling.
Those of us who use the media to espouse a particular point of view have a moral responsibility to honor the whole truth, to show respect for differences that exist among us, and embrace a passion for intelligent debate. The current practice of mean-spiritedness and disrespect for a point of view different from one's own simply perpetuates the culture of negativity which is poisoning the community, while simultaneously showing a bad example to our youth.
We have absolutely nothing to lose by educating ourselves on the issues which affect our daily lives. Education is the hallmark of a true and effective democracy.
Ronald E. Russell
St. Croix
It is now patently clear that the issue of whether video lottery terminals should be allowed on St. Thomas has split the Virgin Islands community, with strong opinions on both sides. At a recent "anti-VLT" rally at the Christiansted bandstand, I attempted to introduce the idea of a public forum to debate both sides of this volatile issue. To my utter surprise and disappointment, this suggestion was met with boos and hisses. The upshot of this episode is that I am seen as uninformed on the issue and that my failure to "take a stand" means that I do not value public opinion! Nothing is further from the truth.
As private citizens, we have a right to our opinion and there is no obligation to do fair research. As a public official with the responsibility to make decisions affecting the populace, I believe that more is required before "taking a stand." I strongly believe that my position as an elected official requires that I not only inform myself, but also show to the public that I value input regarding all sides of any issue. This must not be confused with a lack of understanding of the subject matter. When I say that I need to weigh both sides of the issue, it does not mean that I have not read or understood the VLT law. What I value most is a non-emotional approach to such a very divisive issue.
Those who oppose the presence of these gambling devices have been extremely vocal in characterizing them as the "crack cocaine of gambling" and lamenting the detrimental effects on the social fabric of these islands. There are stories of homes lost, families destroyed, even suicides.
The proponents are just as convinced that the VLT's, which currently exist in several mainland states, can bring millions of dollars into the stagnant Virgin Islands economy. For example, VLT's have raked in millions for the government in places like Ohio and Delaware. According to a report in the Cincinnati Enquirer (Wed., July 21, 1999), "Slot machines helped pay off a $89-million debt in 18 months for Iowa's only thoroughbred race track." At a race track in Wilmington, Delaware, VLT's helped boost daily purses from $75,000 in 1995 to $250,000 in 1999."
There is ample evidence to support both sides. However, with the repeal of the existing legislation pending, with the case now being litigated in court, and noting the emotional response of the members of the community who are against introduction of the VLT's, some deliberation and study is in order.
The VLT issue has affected other communities in a similar way. From provinces in Canada to the far reaches of New Jersey, politicians and leaders are faced with the issue of the value of VLT's. It is instructive that the more reasoned leaders are taking the emotion out of the debate by providing forums for discussion of all aspects of the issue.
For example, in Canada, the VLT issue was threatening to split communities sharply down the middle. Some provinces were repealing them as a bad idea while others were interested in installing them. In response, the University of Alberta organized a conference on VLT's and video gaming. The three-day conference, subtitled "Issues and Impacts" brought together speakers representing a wide spectrum of views. The presenters came from diverse backgrounds and included academics, clergy, law-enforcement personnel, local government officials, members of the gambling industry, and even an employee of a company that programs and manufactures video gambling machines and a former blackjack dealer who trains people to work in casinos.
The promoter of the Canada conference stated, "We're seeing that there really are a lot of complex issues involved — even more than we thought. I think that there's a tendency to believe that some of these public policy issues are more simple than they actually are."
Additionally, as recently as last week, the governor of New Jersey, James E. McGreevey, appointed a commission to study the feasibility of VLT's at state-owned racetracks in North Jersey. The commission is charged with examining "the legal, economic and policy issues surrounding video lotteries in order to provide a thorough and extensive review of its implications in the state." The commission comprises New Jersey's attorney general, the chair of its Casino Control Commission, a university president, the executive director of the local AARP, and an assemblyman. With that in mind, my recent suggestion of a public debate/discussion on the issue of video lottery terminals should not come as such a shock and need not be interpreted as waffling or indecision.
It has been said that "leaders should lead." Although this phrase has superficial appeal, it is being used to suggest that I take a stand on a particular issue within a period of time which is determined completely by public sentiment. Let me repeat: As a public official, I value public opinion. Dialogue, research and deliberation are integral elements of a vibrant democracy. Although the rule of majority governs, democracy works better with an educated majority. As a democratically elected public representative, I believe it is my job to assist in that process.
That is why, as a leader, I have a responsibility to do more than follow public opinion. I must also honor the process of dialogue, research and deliberation, in order to avoid the pitfalls attached to rushing to judgment. As a legislator, the effects of any ill-conceived action on my part affect many people directly. Even if, in the end, my decision reflects public opinion, such a decision must be preceded by research rather than emotion. I have several people on staff to assist me; therefore, I should use the resources at my disposal to thoroughly research all issues on which I am expected to cast a vote.
The current state of affairs highlights the need for, and absence of, research and deliberation. It is highly likely that research, dialogue and deliberation might have prevented the current status of the issue. The media reports reflected much confusion regarding the identification and number of machines in the territory, whether they were licensed, the contents of the agreement, and the ramifications of terminating the existing contract. The courts are now being petitioned to resolve the debate. To my knowledge, the opponents of the VLT's have not publicly discussed these very significant aspects of the issue, and have not offered any real solutions.
Public debate on this issue provides an independent public service promoting a forum for informed discussion about the political, economic, and social effects of gambling and VLT's. Some opponents of VLT's and intelligent discussion are masquerading as "leaders" while insulting the intelligence of the populace. They have narrowed the debate to "If you support VLT's, you do not support St. Croix." Although I have stated publicly that I do not support any form of gambling, I do not believe that that is the entire debate. Presentation of any point of view necessarily requires balanced research on all aspects of gambling behavior and effects. Open discussion would involve the exploration of the regulatory, legislative, social, and educational issues relating to gambling.
Those of us who use the media to espouse a particular point of view have a moral responsibility to honor the whole truth, to show respect for differences that exist among us, and embrace a passion for intelligent debate. The current practice of mean-spiritedness and disrespect for a point of view different from one's own simply perpetuates the culture of negativity which is poisoning the community, while simultaneously showing a bad example to our youth.
We have absolutely nothing to lose by educating ourselves on the issues which affect our daily lives. Education is the hallmark of a true and effective democracy.
Ronald E. Russell
St. Croix
Editor's note: We welcome an
d encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.
Publisher's note : Like the St. John Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
NON-EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO VLT ISSUE IS NEEDED
Dear Source,
It is now patently clear that the issue of whether video lottery terminals should be allowed on St. Thomas has split the Virgin Islands community, with strong opinions on both sides. At a recent "anti-VLT" rally at the Christiansted bandstand, I attempted to introduce the idea of a public forum to debate both sides of this volatile issue. To my utter surprise and disappointment, this suggestion was met with boos and hisses. The upshot of this episode is that I am seen as uninformed on the issue and that my failure to "take a stand" means that I do not value public opinion! Nothing is further from the truth.
As private citizens, we have a right to our opinion and there is no obligation to do fair research. As a public official with the responsibility to make decisions affecting the populace, I believe that more is required before "taking a stand." I strongly believe that my position as an elected official requires that I not only inform myself, but also show to the public that I value input regarding all sides of any issue. This must not be confused with a lack of understanding of the subject matter. When I say that I need to weigh both sides of the issue, it does not mean that I have not read or understood the VLT law. What I value most is a non-emotional approach to such a very divisive issue.
Those who oppose the presence of these gambling devices have been extremely vocal in characterizing them as the "crack cocaine of gambling" and lamenting the detrimental effects on the social fabric of these islands. There are stories of homes lost, families destroyed, even suicides.
The proponents are just as convinced that the VLT's, which currently exist in several mainland states, can bring millions of dollars into the stagnant Virgin Islands economy. For example, VLT's have raked in millions for the government in places like Ohio and Delaware. According to a report in the Cincinnati Enquirer (Wed., July 21, 1999), "Slot machines helped pay off a $89-million debt in 18 months for Iowa's only thoroughbred race track." At a race track in Wilmington, Delaware, VLT's helped boost daily purses from $75,000 in 1995 to $250,000 in 1999."
There is ample evidence to support both sides. However, with the repeal of the existing legislation pending, with the case now being litigated in court, and noting the emotional response of the members of the community who are against introduction of the VLT's, some deliberation and study is in order.
The VLT issue has affected other communities in a similar way. From provinces in Canada to the far reaches of New Jersey, politicians and leaders are faced with the issue of the value of VLT's. It is instructive that the more reasoned leaders are taking the emotion out of the debate by providing forums for discussion of all aspects of the issue.
For example, in Canada, the VLT issue was threatening to split communities sharply down the middle. Some provinces were repealing them as a bad idea while others were interested in installing them. In response, the University of Alberta organized a conference on VLT's and video gaming. The three-day conference, subtitled "Issues and Impacts" brought together speakers representing a wide spectrum of views. The presenters came from diverse backgrounds and included academics, clergy, law-enforcement personnel, local government officials, members of the gambling industry, and even an employee of a company that programs and manufactures video gambling machines and a former blackjack dealer who trains people to work in casinos.
The promoter of the Canada conference stated, "We're seeing that there really are a lot of complex issues involved — even more than we thought. I think that there's a tendency to believe that some of these public policy issues are more simple than they actually are."
Additionally, as recently as last week, the governor of New Jersey, James E. McGreevey, appointed a commission to study the feasibility of VLT's at state-owned racetracks in North Jersey. The commission is charged with examining "the legal, economic and policy issues surrounding video lotteries in order to provide a thorough and extensive review of its implications in the state." The commission comprises New Jersey's attorney general, the chair of its Casino Control Commission, a university president, the executive director of the local AARP, and an assemblyman. With that in mind, my recent suggestion of a public debate/discussion on the issue of video lottery terminals should not come as such a shock and need not be interpreted as waffling or indecision.
It has been said that "leaders should lead." Although this phrase has superficial appeal, it is being used to suggest that I take a stand on a particular issue within a period of time which is determined completely by public sentiment. Let me repeat: As a public official, I value public opinion. Dialogue, research and deliberation are integral elements of a vibrant democracy. Although the rule of majority governs, democracy works better with an educated majority. As a democratically elected public representative, I believe it is my job to assist in that process.
That is why, as a leader, I have a responsibility to do more than follow public opinion. I must also honor the process of dialogue, research and deliberation, in order to avoid the pitfalls attached to rushing to judgment. As a legislator, the effects of any ill-conceived action on my part affect many people directly. Even if, in the end, my decision reflects public opinion, such a decision must be preceded by research rather than emotion. I have several people on staff to assist me; therefore, I should use the resources at my disposal to thoroughly research all issues on which I am expected to cast a vote.
The current state of affairs highlights the need for, and absence of, research and deliberation. It is highly likely that research, dialogue and deliberation might have prevented the current status of the issue. The media reports reflected much confusion regarding the identification and number of machines in the territory, whether they were licensed, the contents of the agreement, and the ramifications of terminating the existing contract. The courts are now being petitioned to resolve the debate. To my knowledge, the opponents of the VLT's have not publicly discussed these very significant aspects of the issue, and have not offered any real solutions.
Public debate on this issue provides an independent public service promoting a forum for informed discussion about the political, economic, and social effects of gambling and VLT's. Some opponents of VLT's and intelligent discussion are masquerading as "leaders" while insulting the intelligence of the populace. They have narrowed the debate to "If you support VLT's, you do not support St. Croix." Although I have stated publicly that I do not support any form of gambling, I do not believe that that is the entire debate. Presentation of any point of view necessarily requires balanced research on all aspects of gambling behavior and effects. Open discussion would involve the exploration of the regulatory, legislative, social, and educational issues relating to gambling.
Those of us who use the media to espouse a particular point of view have a moral responsibility to honor the whole truth, to show respect for differences that exist among us, and embrace a passion for intelligent debate. The current practice of mean-spiritedness and disrespect for a point of view different from one's own simply perpetuates the culture of negativity which is poisoning the community, while simultaneously showing a bad example to our youth.
We have absolutely nothing to lose by educating ourselves on the issues which affect our daily lives. Education is the hallmark of a true and effective democracy.
Ronald E. Russell
St. Croix
It is now patently clear that the issue of whether video lottery terminals should be allowed on St. Thomas has split the Virgin Islands community, with strong opinions on both sides. At a recent "anti-VLT" rally at the Christiansted bandstand, I attempted to introduce the idea of a public forum to debate both sides of this volatile issue. To my utter surprise and disappointment, this suggestion was met with boos and hisses. The upshot of this episode is that I am seen as uninformed on the issue and that my failure to "take a stand" means that I do not value public opinion! Nothing is further from the truth.
As private citizens, we have a right to our opinion and there is no obligation to do fair research. As a public official with the responsibility to make decisions affecting the populace, I believe that more is required before "taking a stand." I strongly believe that my position as an elected official requires that I not only inform myself, but also show to the public that I value input regarding all sides of any issue. This must not be confused with a lack of understanding of the subject matter. When I say that I need to weigh both sides of the issue, it does not mean that I have not read or understood the VLT law. What I value most is a non-emotional approach to such a very divisive issue.
Those who oppose the presence of these gambling devices have been extremely vocal in characterizing them as the "crack cocaine of gambling" and lamenting the detrimental effects on the social fabric of these islands. There are stories of homes lost, families destroyed, even suicides.
The proponents are just as convinced that the VLT's, which currently exist in several mainland states, can bring millions of dollars into the stagnant Virgin Islands economy. For example, VLT's have raked in millions for the government in places like Ohio and Delaware. According to a report in the Cincinnati Enquirer (Wed., July 21, 1999), "Slot machines helped pay off a $89-million debt in 18 months for Iowa's only thoroughbred race track." At a race track in Wilmington, Delaware, VLT's helped boost daily purses from $75,000 in 1995 to $250,000 in 1999."
There is ample evidence to support both sides. However, with the repeal of the existing legislation pending, with the case now being litigated in court, and noting the emotional response of the members of the community who are against introduction of the VLT's, some deliberation and study is in order.
The VLT issue has affected other communities in a similar way. From provinces in Canada to the far reaches of New Jersey, politicians and leaders are faced with the issue of the value of VLT's. It is instructive that the more reasoned leaders are taking the emotion out of the debate by providing forums for discussion of all aspects of the issue.
For example, in Canada, the VLT issue was threatening to split communities sharply down the middle. Some provinces were repealing them as a bad idea while others were interested in installing them. In response, the University of Alberta organized a conference on VLT's and video gaming. The three-day conference, subtitled "Issues and Impacts" brought together speakers representing a wide spectrum of views. The presenters came from diverse backgrounds and included academics, clergy, law-enforcement personnel, local government officials, members of the gambling industry, and even an employee of a company that programs and manufactures video gambling machines and a former blackjack dealer who trains people to work in casinos.
The promoter of the Canada conference stated, "We're seeing that there really are a lot of complex issues involved — even more than we thought. I think that there's a tendency to believe that some of these public policy issues are more simple than they actually are."
Additionally, as recently as last week, the governor of New Jersey, James E. McGreevey, appointed a commission to study the feasibility of VLT's at state-owned racetracks in North Jersey. The commission is charged with examining "the legal, economic and policy issues surrounding video lotteries in order to provide a thorough and extensive review of its implications in the state." The commission comprises New Jersey's attorney general, the chair of its Casino Control Commission, a university president, the executive director of the local AARP, and an assemblyman. With that in mind, my recent suggestion of a public debate/discussion on the issue of video lottery terminals should not come as such a shock and need not be interpreted as waffling or indecision.
It has been said that "leaders should lead." Although this phrase has superficial appeal, it is being used to suggest that I take a stand on a particular issue within a period of time which is determined completely by public sentiment. Let me repeat: As a public official, I value public opinion. Dialogue, research and deliberation are integral elements of a vibrant democracy. Although the rule of majority governs, democracy works better with an educated majority. As a democratically elected public representative, I believe it is my job to assist in that process.
That is why, as a leader, I have a responsibility to do more than follow public opinion. I must also honor the process of dialogue, research and deliberation, in order to avoid the pitfalls attached to rushing to judgment. As a legislator, the effects of any ill-conceived action on my part affect many people directly. Even if, in the end, my decision reflects public opinion, such a decision must be preceded by research rather than emotion. I have several people on staff to assist me; therefore, I should use the resources at my disposal to thoroughly research all issues on which I am expected to cast a vote.
The current state of affairs highlights the need for, and absence of, research and deliberation. It is highly likely that research, dialogue and deliberation might have prevented the current status of the issue. The media reports reflected much confusion regarding the identification and number of machines in the territory, whether they were licensed, the contents of the agreement, and the ramifications of terminating the existing contract. The courts are now being petitioned to resolve the debate. To my knowledge, the opponents of the VLT's have not publicly discussed these very significant aspects of the issue, and have not offered any real solutions.
Public debate on this issue provides an independent public service promoting a forum for informed discussion about the political, economic, and social effects of gambling and VLT's. Some opponents of VLT's and intelligent discussion are masquerading as "leaders" while insulting the intelligence of the populace. They have narrowed the debate to "If you support VLT's, you do not support St. Croix." Although I have stated publicly that I do not support any form of gambling, I do not believe that that is the entire debate. Presentation of any point of view necessarily requires balanced research on all aspects of gambling behavior and effects. Open discussion would involve the exploration of the regulatory, legislative, social, and educational issues relating to gambling.
Those of us who use the media to espouse a particular point of view have a moral responsibility to honor the whole truth, to show respect for differences that exist among us, and embrace a passion for intelligent debate. The current practice of mean-spiritedness and disrespect for a point of view different from one's own simply perpetuates the culture of negativity which is poisoning the community, while simultaneously showing a bad example to our youth.
We have absolutely nothing to lose by educating ourselves on the issues which affect our daily lives. Education is the hallmark of a true and effective democracy.
Ronald E. Russell
St. Croix
Editor's note: We welcome an
d encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.
Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
RESORT DEVELOPER DEMANDS HIGH-RISE, NO VLT'S
Feb. 25, 2003 – Issuing ultimatums is probably not the best approach to getting the controversial video lottery terminal legislation repealed, according to Eileen Petersen, Casino Control Commission chair, but a group planning a $500 million resort and casino on St. Croix issued one for that and more on Tuesday.
The local attorney for Robin Bay Associates said in a terse release that if the law allowing the gambling machines, known as VLT's, on St. Thomas and St. John is not repealed by March 20, developer Curtis Robinson will look for a new home for his Seven Hills Beach Resort and Casino project.
Robinson has said repeatedly that VLT's would jeopardize his ability to secure financial backing for the mammoth project on St. Croix's south shore. But Tuesday's five-sentence release states that "an international source" has made a financial proposal for its development, and that "construction of the mega resort can begin by July 2003."
However, the statement continues, Robinson "will not proceed with the development unless (a.) the law authorizing VLT's is repealed and (b.) Virgin Islands Code is amended to permit the construction of a 12-story resort/convention center."
The second demand is something new. Previously published plans for the resort cited a hotel of 300 rooms but never mentioned a high-rise building. Three hundred rooms is the minimum size hotel for the "Casino II" license that the casino gaming commission has reserved for Robin Bay Associates. The maximum size is 1,200 rooms.
The financial commitment now on the table has an expiration date of March 21, according to the release. "If the requested preconditions are not in place by March 20," it states, "Curtis Robinson will move his development to another Caribbean destination."
Robin Bay attorney Jeffrey Moorhead, who signed the release, did not return telephone calls Tuesday. Robinson also was unavailable for comment.
"I don't believe in ultimatums," Petersen said Tuesday. "I believe in reasoning. If you're dealing with reasonable people, you will get reasonable results."
Petersen said she found the Robinson's conditions "unusual." "I don't know if he was misunderstood or misinterpreted, or if his feelings were misconstrued," she said.
Petersen has been a staunch opponent all along of video lottery terminals, which she has termed "slot machines." She said the Senate has failed to explain why the video gambling law now in force is threadbare of safeguards to prevent minors from playing, to limit the placement of VLT's to tourist areas, and to ensure that the machines are properly tested and licensed.
The strongest "explanation" on the part of some legislators, she said, is that the machines will bring in a projected $12 million a year. "The only statement they will make is that we will get money," Petersen said. "Well, we can sell weapons and get money. We can sell drugs and get money."
She said states including Delaware and Oregon have much more stringent rules about video gaming. And some states, such as North and South Carolina, are looking to get rid of their VLT's because they have had a detrimental affect on communities there, she said.
The pullout of Robin Bay would be another huge blow to St. Croix's already fragile economy. Last spring, all but one of the cruise ships that had been calling at the island scratched their scheduled visits for this season and next, citing crime and low demand for the island as the major reasons.
Robin Bay Associates also threatened to abandon its plans for St. Croix a year and a half ago, when the 24th Legislature, for the second time, passed legislation legalizing video lottery operations territorywide. When Turnbull, for the second time, vetoed the measure, Moorhead said the Seven Hills developers had resolved to go forward with their plans. (See "Major casino plans reported back on track".)
Moorhead said at that time that his office had received invitations from the Dominican Republic and the Eastern Caribbean to relocate the resort to those locales.
In December 2001, the Casino Control Commission voted to reserve one of the territory's two allowed "Casino II" licenses for Robin Bay Associates. The Legislature approved and the governor signed rezoning for the project a year ago. Last May, the Public Finance Authority approved $35 million in private activity bonds for the project.
On Dec. 23, the 24th Legislature in its final session overrode the governor's third veto of VLT enabling legislation. The new law restricts their operation to the St. Thomas-St. John district.
A top official of the territory's only operating casino, at the Divi Carina Bay Resort, has also been vocal all along in opposing the introduction of VLT's.
In October of 2001, the gaming commission reserved the other authorized "Casino II" license for Golden Gaming Inc. The Golden Gaming proposal is for development of a 400-room hotel, 18-hole golf course and casino on 265 acres at Great Pond Bay, slightly to the west of Robin Bay.
Publisher's note : Like the St. John Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
The local attorney for Robin Bay Associates said in a terse release that if the law allowing the gambling machines, known as VLT's, on St. Thomas and St. John is not repealed by March 20, developer Curtis Robinson will look for a new home for his Seven Hills Beach Resort and Casino project.
Robinson has said repeatedly that VLT's would jeopardize his ability to secure financial backing for the mammoth project on St. Croix's south shore. But Tuesday's five-sentence release states that "an international source" has made a financial proposal for its development, and that "construction of the mega resort can begin by July 2003."
However, the statement continues, Robinson "will not proceed with the development unless (a.) the law authorizing VLT's is repealed and (b.) Virgin Islands Code is amended to permit the construction of a 12-story resort/convention center."
The second demand is something new. Previously published plans for the resort cited a hotel of 300 rooms but never mentioned a high-rise building. Three hundred rooms is the minimum size hotel for the "Casino II" license that the casino gaming commission has reserved for Robin Bay Associates. The maximum size is 1,200 rooms.
The financial commitment now on the table has an expiration date of March 21, according to the release. "If the requested preconditions are not in place by March 20," it states, "Curtis Robinson will move his development to another Caribbean destination."
Robin Bay attorney Jeffrey Moorhead, who signed the release, did not return telephone calls Tuesday. Robinson also was unavailable for comment.
"I don't believe in ultimatums," Petersen said Tuesday. "I believe in reasoning. If you're dealing with reasonable people, you will get reasonable results."
Petersen said she found the Robinson's conditions "unusual." "I don't know if he was misunderstood or misinterpreted, or if his feelings were misconstrued," she said.
Petersen has been a staunch opponent all along of video lottery terminals, which she has termed "slot machines." She said the Senate has failed to explain why the video gambling law now in force is threadbare of safeguards to prevent minors from playing, to limit the placement of VLT's to tourist areas, and to ensure that the machines are properly tested and licensed.
The strongest "explanation" on the part of some legislators, she said, is that the machines will bring in a projected $12 million a year. "The only statement they will make is that we will get money," Petersen said. "Well, we can sell weapons and get money. We can sell drugs and get money."
She said states including Delaware and Oregon have much more stringent rules about video gaming. And some states, such as North and South Carolina, are looking to get rid of their VLT's because they have had a detrimental affect on communities there, she said.
The pullout of Robin Bay would be another huge blow to St. Croix's already fragile economy. Last spring, all but one of the cruise ships that had been calling at the island scratched their scheduled visits for this season and next, citing crime and low demand for the island as the major reasons.
Robin Bay Associates also threatened to abandon its plans for St. Croix a year and a half ago, when the 24th Legislature, for the second time, passed legislation legalizing video lottery operations territorywide. When Turnbull, for the second time, vetoed the measure, Moorhead said the Seven Hills developers had resolved to go forward with their plans. (See "Major casino plans reported back on track".)
Moorhead said at that time that his office had received invitations from the Dominican Republic and the Eastern Caribbean to relocate the resort to those locales.
In December 2001, the Casino Control Commission voted to reserve one of the territory's two allowed "Casino II" licenses for Robin Bay Associates. The Legislature approved and the governor signed rezoning for the project a year ago. Last May, the Public Finance Authority approved $35 million in private activity bonds for the project.
On Dec. 23, the 24th Legislature in its final session overrode the governor's third veto of VLT enabling legislation. The new law restricts their operation to the St. Thomas-St. John district.
A top official of the territory's only operating casino, at the Divi Carina Bay Resort, has also been vocal all along in opposing the introduction of VLT's.
In October of 2001, the gaming commission reserved the other authorized "Casino II" license for Golden Gaming Inc. The Golden Gaming proposal is for development of a 400-room hotel, 18-hole golf course and casino on 265 acres at Great Pond Bay, slightly to the west of Robin Bay.
Publisher's note : Like the St. John Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
CHANGE WILL KEEP SHIP IN CARIBBEAN FOR SUMMER
Feb. 25, 2003 – The cruise ship Grand Princess, which had been scheduled to leave the Caribbean in the spring to operate in the Mediterranean over the summer will instead remain in the Caribbean, The West Indian Co. announced on Tuesday.
The 2,600-passenger ship will alternate weekly Eastern Caribbean and Western Caribbean itineraries for the summer season beginning May 4. Sailing out of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, the vessel will be calling at St. Thomas on its eastern route, on alternate Wednesdays between May 14 and Sept. 17.
WICO announced the repositioning of the Grand Princess following the conclusion of discussions with Princess Cruises regarding the deployment and berthing of its ships for the next year. No reason was given for the company's decision not to operate the Grand Princess in the Mediterranean. While there are widespread concerns about looming war in the Middle East, Princess will have another ship cruising there this summer.
Other Princess plans:
– The 1,950-passenger Sun Princess will return from Alaska on Oct. 5 to begin calling at St. Thomas on alternate weeks through April 24, 2004.
– Its twin sister ship, the 1,950-passenger Dawn Princess, also will return from Alaska and will be visiting St. Thomas weekly from Oct. 11 through April 19, 2004.
– The 2.600-passenger Golden Princess, sister ship to the Grand, will return from the Mediterranean on Oct. 29 and call weekly through April 28, 2004. After that, commencing May 4, 2004, the ship will alternate seven-day Southern Classic (Barbados, St. Lucia, Antigua, Sint Maarten, St. Thomas) and Southern Caribbean Explorer (St. Thomas, St. Kitts, Grenada, Caracas, Aruba) itineraries out of San Juan.
– A new ship, one which will break the 3,000-passenger barrier, is scheduled to begin year-round cruises of the Eastern and Western Caribbean on April 17, 2004. The 3,100-passenger, $500 million Caribbean Princess is a "grand class" ship. Sailing out of Fort Lauderdale, it will visit St. Thomas on alternate Tuesdays beginning April 27, 2004, with further stops at Sint Maarten and the Princess Cays in the Bahamas.
Edward E. Thomas Sr. WICO president, said he was pleased to conclude arrangements with Princess Cruises prior to the upcoming 2003 Seatrade convention, "where competition among destinations is at its toughest."
The 19th annual Seatrade Cruise Shipping Convention is set for March 3-6 in Miami Beach, Florida. Attendance topped 10,000 at last year's event, also at Miami Beach. It was at that event that Gov. Charles W. Turnbull announced via a release that he had "canceled" a Port Authority agreement with two cruise companies — Carnival and Royal Caribbean — which called for the companies to invest $31 million in expanding the Crown Bay dock and developing an adjacent shopping center in return for economic incentives.
Publisher's note : Like the St. John Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
The 2,600-passenger ship will alternate weekly Eastern Caribbean and Western Caribbean itineraries for the summer season beginning May 4. Sailing out of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, the vessel will be calling at St. Thomas on its eastern route, on alternate Wednesdays between May 14 and Sept. 17.
WICO announced the repositioning of the Grand Princess following the conclusion of discussions with Princess Cruises regarding the deployment and berthing of its ships for the next year. No reason was given for the company's decision not to operate the Grand Princess in the Mediterranean. While there are widespread concerns about looming war in the Middle East, Princess will have another ship cruising there this summer.
Other Princess plans:
– The 1,950-passenger Sun Princess will return from Alaska on Oct. 5 to begin calling at St. Thomas on alternate weeks through April 24, 2004.
– Its twin sister ship, the 1,950-passenger Dawn Princess, also will return from Alaska and will be visiting St. Thomas weekly from Oct. 11 through April 19, 2004.
– The 2.600-passenger Golden Princess, sister ship to the Grand, will return from the Mediterranean on Oct. 29 and call weekly through April 28, 2004. After that, commencing May 4, 2004, the ship will alternate seven-day Southern Classic (Barbados, St. Lucia, Antigua, Sint Maarten, St. Thomas) and Southern Caribbean Explorer (St. Thomas, St. Kitts, Grenada, Caracas, Aruba) itineraries out of San Juan.
– A new ship, one which will break the 3,000-passenger barrier, is scheduled to begin year-round cruises of the Eastern and Western Caribbean on April 17, 2004. The 3,100-passenger, $500 million Caribbean Princess is a "grand class" ship. Sailing out of Fort Lauderdale, it will visit St. Thomas on alternate Tuesdays beginning April 27, 2004, with further stops at Sint Maarten and the Princess Cays in the Bahamas.
Edward E. Thomas Sr. WICO president, said he was pleased to conclude arrangements with Princess Cruises prior to the upcoming 2003 Seatrade convention, "where competition among destinations is at its toughest."
The 19th annual Seatrade Cruise Shipping Convention is set for March 3-6 in Miami Beach, Florida. Attendance topped 10,000 at last year's event, also at Miami Beach. It was at that event that Gov. Charles W. Turnbull announced via a release that he had "canceled" a Port Authority agreement with two cruise companies — Carnival and Royal Caribbean — which called for the companies to invest $31 million in expanding the Crown Bay dock and developing an adjacent shopping center in return for economic incentives.
Publisher's note : Like the St. John Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
RESORT DEVELOPER DEMANDS HIGH-RISE, NO VLT'S
Feb. 25, 2003 – Issuing ultimatums is probably not the best approach to getting the controversial video lottery terminal legislation repealed, according to Eileen Petersen, Casino Control Commission chair, but a group planning a $500 million resort and casino on St. Croix issued one for that and more on Tuesday.
The local attorney for Robin Bay Associates said in a terse release that if the law allowing the gambling machines, known as VLT's, on St. Thomas and St. John is not repealed by March 20, developer Curtis Robinson will look for a new home for his Seven Hills Beach Resort and Casino project.
Robinson has said repeatedly that VLT's would jeopardize his ability to secure financial backing for the mammoth project on St. Croix's south shore. But Tuesday's five-sentence release states that "an international source" has made a financial proposal for its development, and that "construction of the mega resort can begin by July 2003."
However, the statement continues, Robinson "will not proceed with the development unless (a.) the law authorizing VLT's is repealed and (b.) Virgin Islands Code is amended to permit the construction of a 12-story resort/convention center."
The second demand is something new. Previously published plans for the resort cited a hotel of 300 rooms but never mentioned a high-rise building. Three hundred rooms is the minimum size hotel for the "Casino II" license that the casino gaming commission has reserved for Robin Bay Associates. The maximum size is 1,200 rooms.
The financial commitment now on the table has an expiration date of March 21, according to the release. "If the requested preconditions are not in place by March 20," it states, "Curtis Robinson will move his development to another Caribbean destination."
Robin Bay attorney Jeffrey Moorhead, who signed the release, did not return telephone calls Tuesday. Robinson also was unavailable for comment.
"I don't believe in ultimatums," Petersen said Tuesday. "I believe in reasoning. If you're dealing with reasonable people, you will get reasonable results."
Petersen said she found the Robinson's conditions "unusual." "I don't know if he was misunderstood or misinterpreted, or if his feelings were misconstrued," she said.
Petersen has been a staunch opponent all along of video lottery terminals, which she has termed "slot machines." She said the Senate has failed to explain why the video gambling law now in force is threadbare of safeguards to prevent minors from playing, to limit the placement of VLT's to tourist areas, and to ensure that the machines are properly tested and licensed.
The strongest "explanation" on the part of some legislators, she said, is that the machines will bring in a projected $12 million a year. "The only statement they will make is that we will get money," Petersen said. "Well, we can sell weapons and get money. We can sell drugs and get money."
She said states including Delaware and Oregon have much more stringent rules about video gaming. And some states, such as North and South Carolina, are looking to get rid of their VLT's because they have had a detrimental affect on communities there, she said.
The pullout of Robin Bay would be another huge blow to St. Croix's already fragile economy. Last spring, all but one of the cruise ships that had been calling at the island scratched their scheduled visits for this season and next, citing crime and low demand for the island as the major reasons.
Robin Bay Associates also threatened to abandon its plans for St. Croix a year and a half ago, when the 24th Legislature, for the second time, passed legislation legalizing video lottery operations territorywide. When Turnbull, for the second time, vetoed the measure, Moorhead said the Seven Hills developers had resolved to go forward with their plans. (See "Major casino plans reported back on track".)
Moorhead said at that time that his office had received invitations from the Dominican Republic and the Eastern Caribbean to relocate the resort to those locales.
In December 2001, the Casino Control Commission voted to reserve one of the territory's two allowed "Casino II" licenses for Robin Bay Associates. The Legislature approved and the governor signed rezoning for the project a year ago. Last May, the Public Finance Authority approved $35 million in private activity bonds for the project.
On Dec. 23, the 24th Legislature in its final session overrode the governor's third veto of VLT enabling legislation. The new law restricts their operation to the St. Thomas-St. John district.
A top official of the territory's only operating casino, at the Divi Carina Bay Resort, has also been vocal all along in opposing the introduction of VLT's.
In October of 2001, the gaming commission reserved the other authorized "Casino II" license for Golden Gaming Inc. The Golden Gaming proposal is for development of a 400-room hotel, 18-hole golf course and casino on 265 acres at Great Pond Bay, slightly to the west of Robin Bay.
Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
The local attorney for Robin Bay Associates said in a terse release that if the law allowing the gambling machines, known as VLT's, on St. Thomas and St. John is not repealed by March 20, developer Curtis Robinson will look for a new home for his Seven Hills Beach Resort and Casino project.
Robinson has said repeatedly that VLT's would jeopardize his ability to secure financial backing for the mammoth project on St. Croix's south shore. But Tuesday's five-sentence release states that "an international source" has made a financial proposal for its development, and that "construction of the mega resort can begin by July 2003."
However, the statement continues, Robinson "will not proceed with the development unless (a.) the law authorizing VLT's is repealed and (b.) Virgin Islands Code is amended to permit the construction of a 12-story resort/convention center."
The second demand is something new. Previously published plans for the resort cited a hotel of 300 rooms but never mentioned a high-rise building. Three hundred rooms is the minimum size hotel for the "Casino II" license that the casino gaming commission has reserved for Robin Bay Associates. The maximum size is 1,200 rooms.
The financial commitment now on the table has an expiration date of March 21, according to the release. "If the requested preconditions are not in place by March 20," it states, "Curtis Robinson will move his development to another Caribbean destination."
Robin Bay attorney Jeffrey Moorhead, who signed the release, did not return telephone calls Tuesday. Robinson also was unavailable for comment.
"I don't believe in ultimatums," Petersen said Tuesday. "I believe in reasoning. If you're dealing with reasonable people, you will get reasonable results."
Petersen said she found the Robinson's conditions "unusual." "I don't know if he was misunderstood or misinterpreted, or if his feelings were misconstrued," she said.
Petersen has been a staunch opponent all along of video lottery terminals, which she has termed "slot machines." She said the Senate has failed to explain why the video gambling law now in force is threadbare of safeguards to prevent minors from playing, to limit the placement of VLT's to tourist areas, and to ensure that the machines are properly tested and licensed.
The strongest "explanation" on the part of some legislators, she said, is that the machines will bring in a projected $12 million a year. "The only statement they will make is that we will get money," Petersen said. "Well, we can sell weapons and get money. We can sell drugs and get money."
She said states including Delaware and Oregon have much more stringent rules about video gaming. And some states, such as North and South Carolina, are looking to get rid of their VLT's because they have had a detrimental affect on communities there, she said.
The pullout of Robin Bay would be another huge blow to St. Croix's already fragile economy. Last spring, all but one of the cruise ships that had been calling at the island scratched their scheduled visits for this season and next, citing crime and low demand for the island as the major reasons.
Robin Bay Associates also threatened to abandon its plans for St. Croix a year and a half ago, when the 24th Legislature, for the second time, passed legislation legalizing video lottery operations territorywide. When Turnbull, for the second time, vetoed the measure, Moorhead said the Seven Hills developers had resolved to go forward with their plans. (See "Major casino plans reported back on track".)
Moorhead said at that time that his office had received invitations from the Dominican Republic and the Eastern Caribbean to relocate the resort to those locales.
In December 2001, the Casino Control Commission voted to reserve one of the territory's two allowed "Casino II" licenses for Robin Bay Associates. The Legislature approved and the governor signed rezoning for the project a year ago. Last May, the Public Finance Authority approved $35 million in private activity bonds for the project.
On Dec. 23, the 24th Legislature in its final session overrode the governor's third veto of VLT enabling legislation. The new law restricts their operation to the St. Thomas-St. John district.
A top official of the territory's only operating casino, at the Divi Carina Bay Resort, has also been vocal all along in opposing the introduction of VLT's.
In October of 2001, the gaming commission reserved the other authorized "Casino II" license for Golden Gaming Inc. The Golden Gaming proposal is for development of a 400-room hotel, 18-hole golf course and casino on 265 acres at Great Pond Bay, slightly to the west of Robin Bay.
Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
BUY LINDQVIST BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE, LIBURD URGES
Feb. 25, 2003 – Sen. Almando "Rocky" Liburd, who sponsored and secured passage of legislation for government acquisition of Lindqvist Beach last spring, has urged Gov. Charles W. Turnbull to act fast on closing the deal because private parties interested in the property are already making their moves.
In a letter dated Feb. 21, Liburd told the governor that an outside investor has begun negotiations for the Lindqvist property, a 21-acre tract that includes some 900 feet of white sandy beach. The land is located off Smith Bay Road on St. Thomas's northeast shore.
Last April, the Senate approved the government's purchase of the property as part of a "Christmas tree" bill laden with numerous unrelated appropriations. The lawmakers called for spending $3.5 million "or as much thereof as may be necessary" from interest earned on bond proceeds to buy the prime beachfront property. The measure also mandated that the beach be operated publicly by an authority similar to that in place at Magens Bay beach.
Additional funding was subsequently identified through the Planning and Natural Resources Department, DPNR Commissioner Dean Plaskett told the Source recently. However, he would not specify where the additional money would come from.
Liburd, who was president of the 24th Legislature, wrote the governor on Friday: "Since time is of the essence, I am urging you to have the $3.5 million released and to appoint a government representative to start the negotiations. It would be a sad day in Virgin Islands history if we sit idly by and do absolutely nothing."
In an interview prior to his writing of the letter, Liburd told the Source he was frustrated that despite the lawmakers' efforts made to preserve one of the last pieces of pristine shoreline on St. Thomas's East End, the opportunity to do so was apparently slipping away.
Turnbull's legal counsel, Paul Gimenez, said recently that going ahead with the land acquisition was still a priority for the chief executive. However, Gimenez declined comment when asked what stage the negotiations had reached. He also said he had no knowledge of the funds Plaskett said he had found for the acquisition through DPNR.
"We're still exploring the possibility of acquiring Lindqvist Beach," Gimenez said. "It is the governor's wish that Lindqvist Beach become a public park."
But according to St. Thomas attorney George H.T. Dudley, there are other parties with wishes of their own. Dudley said he was aware of a transaction involving a portion of the Lindqvist property, but he pointed out that different portions of the area are owned by different people.
Dudley said the transaction with which he was familiar had reached the contract stage. He declined to name the parties involved or to describe the specific area involved.
Liburd in his letter urged the governor to make "some type of movement on this issue," since it appeared an outside investor may have already reached agreement to obtain at least a part of the property.
"Nine months have passed," Liburd said, "and to date no steps have been taken on behalf of the government representative to start the negotiations."
For more details about the property, see "V.I. government wants to buy Lindqvist Beach".
Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
In a letter dated Feb. 21, Liburd told the governor that an outside investor has begun negotiations for the Lindqvist property, a 21-acre tract that includes some 900 feet of white sandy beach. The land is located off Smith Bay Road on St. Thomas's northeast shore.
Last April, the Senate approved the government's purchase of the property as part of a "Christmas tree" bill laden with numerous unrelated appropriations. The lawmakers called for spending $3.5 million "or as much thereof as may be necessary" from interest earned on bond proceeds to buy the prime beachfront property. The measure also mandated that the beach be operated publicly by an authority similar to that in place at Magens Bay beach.
Additional funding was subsequently identified through the Planning and Natural Resources Department, DPNR Commissioner Dean Plaskett told the Source recently. However, he would not specify where the additional money would come from.
Liburd, who was president of the 24th Legislature, wrote the governor on Friday: "Since time is of the essence, I am urging you to have the $3.5 million released and to appoint a government representative to start the negotiations. It would be a sad day in Virgin Islands history if we sit idly by and do absolutely nothing."
In an interview prior to his writing of the letter, Liburd told the Source he was frustrated that despite the lawmakers' efforts made to preserve one of the last pieces of pristine shoreline on St. Thomas's East End, the opportunity to do so was apparently slipping away.
Turnbull's legal counsel, Paul Gimenez, said recently that going ahead with the land acquisition was still a priority for the chief executive. However, Gimenez declined comment when asked what stage the negotiations had reached. He also said he had no knowledge of the funds Plaskett said he had found for the acquisition through DPNR.
"We're still exploring the possibility of acquiring Lindqvist Beach," Gimenez said. "It is the governor's wish that Lindqvist Beach become a public park."
But according to St. Thomas attorney George H.T. Dudley, there are other parties with wishes of their own. Dudley said he was aware of a transaction involving a portion of the Lindqvist property, but he pointed out that different portions of the area are owned by different people.
Dudley said the transaction with which he was familiar had reached the contract stage. He declined to name the parties involved or to describe the specific area involved.
Liburd in his letter urged the governor to make "some type of movement on this issue," since it appeared an outside investor may have already reached agreement to obtain at least a part of the property.
"Nine months have passed," Liburd said, "and to date no steps have been taken on behalf of the government representative to start the negotiations."
For more details about the property, see "V.I. government wants to buy Lindqvist Beach".
Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
CHANGE WILL KEEP SHIP IN CARIBBEAN FOR SUMMER
Feb. 25, 2003 – The cruise ship Grand Princess, which had been scheduled to leave the Caribbean in the spring to operate in the Mediterranean over the summer, will instead remain in the Caribbean, The West Indian Co. announced on Tuesday.
The 2,600-passenger ship will alternate weekly Eastern Caribbean and Western Caribbean itineraries for the summer season beginning May 4. Sailing out of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., the vessel will be calling at St. Thomas on its eastern route, on alternate Wednesdays between May 14 and Sept. 17.
WICO announced the repositioning of the Grand Princess after concluding discussions with Princess Cruises about the deployment and berthing of its ships for the next year. No reason was given for the company's decision not to operate the Grand Princess in the Mediterranean. While there are widespread concerns about looming war in the Middle East, Princess will have another ship cruising there this summer.
Other Princess plans:
– The 1,950-passenger Sun Princess will return from Alaska on Oct. 5 to begin calling at St. Thomas on alternate weeks through April 24, 2004.
– Its twin sister ship, the 1,950-passenger Dawn Princess, also will return from Alaska and will visit St. Thomas weekly from Oct. 11 through April 19, 2004.
– The 2.600-passenger Golden Princess, sister ship to the Grand, will return from the Mediterranean on Oct. 29 and call weekly through April 28, 2004. After that, commencing May 4, 2004, the ship will alternate seven-day Southern Classic (Barbados, St. Lucia, Antigua, Sint Maarten, St. Thomas) and Southern Caribbean Explorer (St. Thomas, St. Kitts, Grenada, Caracas, Aruba) itineraries out of San Juan.
– A new ship, one that will break the 3,000-passenger barrier, is scheduled to begin year-round cruises of the Eastern and Western Caribbean on April 17, 2004. The 3,100-passenger, $500 million Caribbean Princess is a "grand class" ship. Sailing out of Fort Lauderdale, it will visit St. Thomas on alternate Tuesdays beginning April 27, 2004, with further stops at Sint Maarten and the Princess Cays in the Bahamas.
Edward E. Thomas Sr., WICO president, said he was pleased to conclude arrangements with Princess Cruises prior to the upcoming 2003 Seatrade convention, "where competition among destinations is at its toughest."
The 19th annual Seatrade Cruise Shipping Convention is set for March 3-6 in Miami Beach. Attendance topped 10,000 at last year's event, also at Miami Beach. It was at that event that Gov. Charles W. Turnbull announced via a release that he had "canceled" a Port Authority agreement with two cruise companies — Carnival and Royal Caribbean — that called for the companies to invest $31 million in expanding the Crown Bay dock and developing an adjacent shopping center in return for economic incentives.
Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
The 2,600-passenger ship will alternate weekly Eastern Caribbean and Western Caribbean itineraries for the summer season beginning May 4. Sailing out of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., the vessel will be calling at St. Thomas on its eastern route, on alternate Wednesdays between May 14 and Sept. 17.
WICO announced the repositioning of the Grand Princess after concluding discussions with Princess Cruises about the deployment and berthing of its ships for the next year. No reason was given for the company's decision not to operate the Grand Princess in the Mediterranean. While there are widespread concerns about looming war in the Middle East, Princess will have another ship cruising there this summer.
Other Princess plans:
– The 1,950-passenger Sun Princess will return from Alaska on Oct. 5 to begin calling at St. Thomas on alternate weeks through April 24, 2004.
– Its twin sister ship, the 1,950-passenger Dawn Princess, also will return from Alaska and will visit St. Thomas weekly from Oct. 11 through April 19, 2004.
– The 2.600-passenger Golden Princess, sister ship to the Grand, will return from the Mediterranean on Oct. 29 and call weekly through April 28, 2004. After that, commencing May 4, 2004, the ship will alternate seven-day Southern Classic (Barbados, St. Lucia, Antigua, Sint Maarten, St. Thomas) and Southern Caribbean Explorer (St. Thomas, St. Kitts, Grenada, Caracas, Aruba) itineraries out of San Juan.
– A new ship, one that will break the 3,000-passenger barrier, is scheduled to begin year-round cruises of the Eastern and Western Caribbean on April 17, 2004. The 3,100-passenger, $500 million Caribbean Princess is a "grand class" ship. Sailing out of Fort Lauderdale, it will visit St. Thomas on alternate Tuesdays beginning April 27, 2004, with further stops at Sint Maarten and the Princess Cays in the Bahamas.
Edward E. Thomas Sr., WICO president, said he was pleased to conclude arrangements with Princess Cruises prior to the upcoming 2003 Seatrade convention, "where competition among destinations is at its toughest."
The 19th annual Seatrade Cruise Shipping Convention is set for March 3-6 in Miami Beach. Attendance topped 10,000 at last year's event, also at Miami Beach. It was at that event that Gov. Charles W. Turnbull announced via a release that he had "canceled" a Port Authority agreement with two cruise companies — Carnival and Royal Caribbean — that called for the companies to invest $31 million in expanding the Crown Bay dock and developing an adjacent shopping center in return for economic incentives.
Publisher's note : Like the St. Thomas Source now? Find out how you can love us twice as much — and show your support for the islands' free and independent news voice … click here.
