SerpApi.Org
The Medical Executive Committee is saddened to hear that SEIU Healthcare Pennsylvania has reportedly voted to issue a strike notice in response to Mount Nittany Medical Center’s latest proposal.
As the dedicated clinicians responsible for patient care at our hospital, our top priority remains the health, safety and well-being of our patients and the community we serve.
It is discouraging to read and hear some of the negative comments circulating about the quality of care we provide. We stand behind the exceptional care delivered by our clinical teams and trust that our community recognizes these remarks do not reflect the high standards we uphold every day.
We also believe it is important to address criticism regarding the investments our organization has made. These investments are focused on strengthening our work environment, expanding access to care and ensuring patients can continue receiving high-quality care close to home. We appreciate the commitment to improving the resources available to both our caregivers and our community.
The Medical Executive Committee has full confidence in the contingency plans developed to ensure the continued delivery of safe, high-quality care during a potential strike. We remain committed to supporting our patients, our colleagues and our community throughout this process.
We encourage all members of SEIU Healthcare Pennsylvania to stay informed, ask questions and carefully consider the proposals before them. We remain hopeful that, through constructive dialogue and a shared commitment to excellent patient care, an agreement can be reached that serves the best interests of everyone involved.
Thomas Covaleski, MD, Chief of Staff, and the Mount Nittany Medical Center Medical Staff Leadership
Revenue Reports Spell Trouble for Happy Valley Casino
The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board’s latest revenue figures released on July 17 show a clear and continuing downward trend for Happy Valley Casino’s average daily gambling revenue [1, 2, 3]. If the casino is able to stabilize its gambling revenue at the level reported for June, it will be on track to generate less than $30 million annually. After paying up to 54% gambling taxes on its retail slots winnings and 16% gambling taxes on its table game winnings to the state — as well as covering payroll, overhead and possibly debt servicing on any financing used during the casino’s development — it is questionable whether or not the casino is even profitable.
The return of Penn State’s students in the fall is unlikely to significantly increase the casino’s revenue. Even if hundreds of Penn State students derail their college careers by gambling away their financial resources in the casino, this won’t really move the needle for the casino’s revenue. Most Penn State students don’t have significant financial resources to begin with. College Township’s independent casino impact study predicted that Penn State students will contribute only $2.6 million to the casino’s gambling revenue each year (see Table 37).
Similarly, tourist traffic is also unlikely to significantly increase the casino’s revenue. Category 4 casinos are not destination resorts and they draw little tourist traffic. Instead, Category 4 casinos typically draw the vast majority of their business from local residents who live within a 30 mile radius. College Township’s independent casino impact study predicted that tourists will contribute less than 14% of the casino’s revenue (see “Recreational Tourists” section and “Happy Valley Casino Demand Projection Summary” table).
Moreover, Penn State football visitors are in town for only a few days of each year. Even assuming that football visitors will drive the casino to operate near its maximum capacity while they are here, College Township’s independent casino impact study predicted these visitors will contribute only $805,767 of additional gambling revenue for the casino each year (see “PSU Football Visitors” section).
Because relatively few major tourist events have occurred during the months for which the casino’s gambling revenue data has been reported, this data shows how much incremental tourist traffic the casino draws to State College on its own. If anything, the data from this “honeymoon period” surrounding the casino’s grand opening likely represents an upper bound for the level of tourist traffic that the casino can attract, because casinos usually experience a surge of interest upon opening that tapers off rapidly during the weeks that follow.
Far from drawing enough additional visitors to revitalize the Nittany Mall, it appears the casino may not be drawing enough visitors to support even itself. The casino has reportedly cut back its restaurant hours and laid off employees. It has not opened its interior doors to the mall. Instead of drawing additional tourist traffic to the region, the casino appears to be competing with area businesses for both local residents’ and existing tourists’ time and money.
Every year that the casino operates, it will extract millions more from the regional economy in the form of gambling taxes than it attracts in incremental tourist revenue. Over time, this extraction of money will likely result in more jobs being lost across the region than the number of people the casino employs itself.
Many people in our community believe that inviting a business that depends upon addiction and imposes numerous social harms in an attempt to improve the local economy was always a Faustian bargain. In retort, those who have supported the casino have had a consistent response, with which I couldn’t agree more:
“If you don’t like the casino, don’t go.”
Andrew Shaffer,
State College
