Walpole neighbors say no dice

South Walpole neighbors say no dice during delegates' tour of the neighborhood
By Veronica Hamlett
Walpole Times

WALPOLE — South Walpole residents told three of the town’s delegates face to face on Tuesday during a walking tour in their area that a Foxboro casino would devastate their neighborhood and force them to move.

Reps. John Rogers (D-Norwood), Paul McMurtry (D-Dedham) and Dan Winslow (R-Norfolk) got a first-hand look at the streets and houses most threatened by a potential Foxboro casino and vowed to fight any a Foxboro casino proposal through the state budgeting process.

All four of Walpole’s representatives are crafting a budget amendment that would prevent state agencies such as the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), from expanding while operating under a deficit – which the MBTA currently does. With a commuter rail study calling for expanded passenger train service to Gillette Stadium via Walpole also in the wings, Rogers said preventing the rail could be a defining nail in the coffin for a Foxboro casino.

“We also realize there’s billions of dollars at stake here, and proponents of this casino will continue to march forward, and we’ll continue to play defense in defense of the people who live in these neighborhoods and all across this regions,” Rogers said. “If the Kraft group commissioned a study to determine one of the worst locations you can site a casino, then they got their money’s worth because we’ve seen this morning how many families and homes would be impacted.”

McMurtry, Rogers and Winslow met with South Walpole residents on Shufelt, Wildwood, Comstock and Concord Streets. Rep. Lou Kafka had a prior commitment.

On Concord Street, resident Mike Freiberger let the representatives see the view from his backyard – Gillette Stadium along with the two water towers and stadium parking that border his property.

Freiberger said he’s mostly concerned for his neighborhood’s safety and home values. He’s not opposed to a development on the land in question, but says a casino would be inappropriate.

“We accept that,” he said of the desire to develop the land. “But, put something that improves the community and quality of life.”

“This is a family neighborhood. We’ve worked hard to provide a safe place, and a casino is going to just destroy it,” said Comstock Street resident Marcia Waitekus. “I can’t stay here if a casino goes up.”

Many Foxboro and Walpole residents have been up and arms as of late as New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and casino developer Steve Wynn discussed building a casino across from Gillette Stadium. Kraft would lease land he owns on Rte. 1 on the Walpole border to Wynn, who would build a resort-style complex with a casino inside.

Foxboro Selectmen voted 3-2 to not enter into a host community agreement with Wynn Resorts, but there is widespread belief that Kraft and Wynn are not finished pushing for a casino.

While Foxboro would be the host community, Rogers believes Walpole could also be defined as one. Under the new gaming legislation, casinos must win approval from the host community with an agreement with Selectmen and then a town-wide ballot vote.

Surrounding communities wouldn’t be able to prevent the siting of a casino.

Rogers believes Walpole could be considered a host community by one of two ways – if the casino connects to Walpole water or sewer services, or if Walpole created an entrance to the casino for emergency police and fire vehicles from Summer Street.

“Therefore, the people of Walpole, rather than just the people of Foxboro, would have a vote on this in the ballot box,” Rogers said. “(Wynn) is going to try to avoid hooking up to Walpole water and sewer because they don’t want another host community, but I think Walpole has grounds.”

Rogers said the new gaming laws could also be amended to change the definition of a host community to include a town that would have residential areas within 250 yards of a casino.

“That would clearly give Walpole a vote, but we feel we don’t have to amend the statute. We have grounds right now to say that we are a host community,” he said. “We’ve seen from today’s tour, it’s only the Walpole homes that are directly affected. It’s all Walpole.”

Winslow went on to meet with Wynn Resort lobbyists that afternoon, the first known meeting between anyone associated with Wynn Resorts or Walpole. Winslow said lobbyists were only interested in hearing how Walpole residents feel about a casino and could not make any promises.

“They left the meeting with an unmistakable sense of lack of community support,” Winslow said. “I think the neighbors have asked for respect, transparency and honesty, and to date they’ve received none.”

“I gave them the sentiment of the community and we’re hoping that they’ll do the right thing,” he added, referring to Kraft and Wynn’s promise to abandon any casino plans if enough opposition exists.

Winslow, Rogers and McMurtry all said the morning stroll opened their eyes even wider to the impact a casino would have on South Walpole.

“The intention of the legislation for resort-destination casinos was not in neighborhoods or communities. It was areas in the Commonwealth that could sustain such a facility and not have an impact on communities,” McMurtry said. “This proposed casino will certainly affect a neighborhood and community, and that’s the community and town of Walpole. It was important for us to see and hear that firsthand.”