Richard Pratt/SourceMedia Group Admin Updated: 3 February 2013 | 6:35 am in conversations

Is proposed 3 percent revenue donation from Cedar Rapids casino appropriate?


Related Stories


thegazette.com Copyright 2011 SourceMedia Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Backers of casinos in Iowa say that the gaming venues have much to offer a community — new jobs; more visitors; a boost to the local economy.

A central selling point for casinos in Iowa, too, long has been the state’s requirement that a certain percentage of gaming revenue be directed to a local non-profit entity, called a “qualified sponsoring organization.” This entity not only holds the state gaming license for the local community, but sees that a certain percentage of the casino’s revenue is dispensed into the community.

However, the percentage of gaming revenue that ends up in the hands of the local sponsoring organization is determined by agreements reached by each casino owner and its sponsoring organization. And as a result, the percentage of revenue going to the sponsoring organization in each of the 15 Iowa communities with non-race track casinos varies — from under 1 percent to 6 percent of the casino’s annual adjusted gross receipts, according to reports filed with the Iowa Racing & Gaming Commission.

The majority of the 15 casinos are paying their sponsoring organizations more than 3 percent, which has been the state-required minimum percentage since 2004. And the minimum is what the Steve Gray-led investor group, Cedar Rapids Development Group LLC, has agreed to pay if it succeeds in building a casino in the Cedar Rapids area.

Read the story linked above for more background on the agreement and why it was reached. What do you think? Is the percentage that the Cedar Rapids casino would return to the community via non-profit donations appropriate?

Rules of Engagement
  • Be truthful. more
  • Be civil. more
  • Be responsible. more
  • Own your words. more
  • Leave the trolls alone. more
  • Take commercial ads elsewhere. more
  • Know that comments will be moderated. more
  • Or what? more
Is proposed 3 percent revenue donation from Cedar Rapids casino appropriate?
  1. I think it should be 6% minimum! The money should be used to fix the city up and make it more presentable and updated!

  2. Hard to tell what would be appropriate. It should be based on how many jobs and what the pay of those jobs are, that will have more affect on the local economy then a donation to a certain group.

  3. So, you set up your non-profit with those who want gambling, then get them to agree with you that the absolute minimum is OK for the next ten years? Then you let the same “organization” make “demands” on the casino for increases, but only if the gross revenues reach a certain dollar amount, what a set up deal. The fact the state allowed for a minimum percentage lower than what many established casinos are currently paying makes me wonder who put that legislation together and for what reason. For all the “good” points these operations bring, I can certainly see many more negative ones. A captured audience isn’t likely to find motel rooms in places far removed from the casino; a casino with food service and bar set up isn’t going to be one that encourages patrons to move beyond the facility. As to other places to go and spend money, most who go to casinos in Iowa aren’t making vacation plans around gambling. If they are, they go to Vegas where other venues are readily available and the shows are not third rate has beens.

  4. Is this Steve Gray the former McLeod USA president? If so enough said.

  5. The agreement is for 10 years and gives the owner Cedar Rapids Development Group the exclusive option to automatically extend the agreement for eight five-year periods.

    So the way I read that is if after the 10 years, if Grey and his group decide to keep fleecing the city, they can extend the agreement as is, for another 40 years (eight five-years periods) without having to agree to anything different to anyone. Which makes me wonder, who was looking out for Cedar Rapids and the citizens of Cedar Rapids. Makes a person sure want to know who had blind investments accounts in the casino.

  6. My 2 cents on all of this – is as a visitor to Cedar Rapids I will not frequent this casino. I think it is the wrong direction for the city to be heading in. Cedar Rapids is developing into a nice place for young families to visit. It has the NewBo marketplace, the Czech village, theaters, and the convention center that attracts family friendly events. A casino does not fit this new image of what Cedar Rapids is growing into. The jobs it will bring do not pay family supporting wages – Cedar Rapids can do better.

    • Better to have 600 jobs then no jobs no matter what they pay! If it helps get some people off the Government teet then great!

  7. Yes the same Steve Gray that said (we have no intentions of filing for bankruptcy ) and then a few months later BINGO half of Linn county lost their shorts.

  8. I am more concerned about Grey & group refusing to say where the casino will be built. I will vote NO if it is going to be downtown, which is why I think they are not saying where it will go. They know that so many people are fed up with the whole downtown disaster that announcing it will be built there will lose votes. The council/mayor have been very quiet about a casino. They are so disliked that they realize they would poison the YES vote. It will not pay a wage that can support a family . Think about what they mean when they say $42,000 AVERAGE wage. Whatever money goes to charity etc will mean nothing when this whole casino/civic center/hotel bad dream blows up and clobbers the tax payers.

  9. I would like the city leaders of Cedar Rapids to decided what they envision for our city. Is the “Rochester South” that was hyped to allow PCI to rob the taxpayers and forever alter the traffic flow, or is the family friendly NewBoMarket, and New Bohemia, or is it the money moved from streets to provide trails so we could be designated as a Blue Zone. The Amphitheater and Convention Complex were touted as bring entertainment to the area even though it was finally admitted that the new Cellular Center would not increase in size and the Convention Complex will actually need to be subsidized by the hotel the city doesn’t want to own forever. Actually suites were added to the arena, which reduced the general seating. The acoustics will be better, but it still will not draw any big name acts. How does a casino fit into this mix. Do our leaders consider casinos healthy and family friendly? Is 3% ($2.4 million) annually for the entire county, not just Cedar Rapids really worth it? And yes, this is being led by Steven Gray, former leader at McLeod and other “unnamed” investors that may or may not even by from Linn County. I wonder if Mr. Frew is an investor…

  10. Very good question on Mr. Frew. Would be very interesting to see the list of investors. You would think it would be public BEFORE the election. Makes you wonder what they are hiding !! No one has mentioned the fact that a YES vote means nothing if the Gambling Comm. denies a license. I’m sure a substantial “donation” to certain politicians can take care of that. That’s the way Iowa works.

    • A complete list would be nice. Everyone is harping on it’s the casinos that are funding the “No” movement. They need to realize this is nothing to them. They are saving their major influence for the Iowa Racing and Gaming Comm vote. I would assume that if the “Yes” votes wins, that it would be an opened ended agreement by the voters and not just to this specific group of investors. I haven’t seen a ballot yet, so I don’t know.




Featured Jobs from corridorcareers.com