27
Toronto’s Casino Debate: Governing ‘Local’ in Law and Space Alexandra Flynn Osgoode Hall Law School AAG Conference (April 2125, 2015)

Presentation - Toronto’s Casino Debate: Governing ‘Local’ in Law and Space

  • Upload
    ubc

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Toronto’s  Casino  Debate:  Governing  ‘Local’  in  Law  and  Space  

 

Alexandra  Flynn  Osgoode  Hall  Law  School  

 AAG  Conference  (April  21-­‐25,  2015)  

1.   Empirical  QuesAon:    What  role  did  social  movements  play  in  the  casino  debate?    2.  TheoreAcal  quesAon:  How  did  social  movements  inform  the  meaning  of  ‘local’  in  Toronto,  from  both  a  governance  and  jurisdicNonal  perspecNve?    

[T]he  definiNonal  work  of  "community"  is  accomplished  intrinsically  –  at  the  borders  between  places.  The  legal  rules  for  incorporaNng  or  excluding  others  generate  both  a  community's  idenNty  and  its  claim  to  self-­‐govern.  …  If  it  is  the  case  that  community  (as  a  normaNve  concept)  and  communiNes  (as  a  descripNve  one)  are  products  of  contested  boundary-­‐creaNng  norms  in  demarcated  space,  then  the  choice  for  courts  and  policy-­‐makers  is  not  between  respect  for  the  local  or  the  force  of  the  universal,  but  between  the  compeNng  force  of  alternaNve  localisms.  

Richard  Schragger,  The  Limits  of  Localism    

 

Source:  City  Manager’s  PresentaNon  (2015  Budget)  

GOVERNANCE  

Community  Councils  

Source:  OLG  ModernizaNon  Plan  Gaming  Zone  Maps  (2012)    

2012-­‐13  Casino  Debate  

Source:  City  Manager:  New  Casino  &  ConvenNon  Development  in  Toronto  (May  2013)      

Focus  of  Staff  Review  

Ernst  &  Young,  Poten@al  Commercial  Casino  in  Toronto  (October  26,  2012)      

Community  Council  SubcommiIee  

Planning  Downtown  

City  Manager,  New  Casino  &  Conven-on  Development  in  Toronto,  CC30.1  (April  5,  2013)  at  32    

Others?  

This  dynamic  understanding  of  the  relaNonship  between  the  "local"  community  and  other  forms  of  community  affiliaNon  (regional,  naNonal,  transnaNonal,  internaNonal,  cosmopolitan)  permits  us  to  conceptualize  legal  jurisdicNon  in  terms  of  social  interacNons  that  are  fluid  processes,  not  moNonless  demarcaNons  frozen  in  Nme  and  space.                      -­‐  Paul  Schiff  Berman  

Concluding  remarks  

1.  Toronto  has  a  messy  governance  model  conNngent  on  social  movements  

2.  ConnecNons  to  diverse  geographies  suggest  re-­‐thinking  singular  ‘local’  idenNNes  

3.  ConcepNons  of  Toronto  as  a  global  city  played  out  in  social  movement  imagery  

4.  Technologies  of  law  and  social  movements  were  diverse  and  overlapping  

Thank  you  

Alexandra  Flynn,  Osgoode  Hall  Law  School  [email protected]