A common reaction to perceived governmental intrusion action is "N.I.M.B.Y." - Not in my back yard. No one wants their front lawn to become a strip mall, and the prospect of turning over the lease on your house for the sake of a new parking lot is about as attractive. No one readily admits to being anti-progress, but we generally don't like to play host, either. It's easy to rationalize. Not in my back yard.

When you vote this Nov. 2, you'll be asked to support or condemn Proposal 1, a "N.I.M.B.Y." issue if there ever was one. Proposal 1 would essentially place the control of state-sponsored gambling in the hands of the local citizens most affected by it. Any new form of authorized gambling would need voter approval, and local voters usurp the tally of the entire state. Basically, if a Michigan resident doesn't want the local race track to have video poker machines, the local voter voice determines the outcome, regardless of what the entire state agrees on.

The three Detroit casinos - MGM Grand, Motor City and Greektown - live a contentious existence. The city of Detroit, with its shaky tax base and long-term economic struggles, has taken in millions in revenue as a result of their existence, but the tangible returns of casino presence - tourism, development, local investment - are yet to be substantiated. The Detroit casinos and Indian tribal gaming are exempt from the provisions of Proposal 1, but the merits behind it explain that Michigan wants to learn from its gambling mistakes and miscues.

Exercising civic duty for the sake of maintaining or improving your own environment is an inherent voter right that deserves to be applied to state gambling. Gambling isn't necessarily evil, but we find the jury to still be out on its benefits.

More room for active citizen participation in the matter is hardly counterproductive. Vote yes on Proposal 1.