Taunton casino foes warn of faulty agreement
ByTAUNTON — Many of the speakers at Preserve Taunton's Future's public forum Wednesday professed to be neither pro- nor anti-gaming, instead recommending that those in attendance research the issue themselves and make up their own minds.
That already seemed to be the case.
When one speaker asked how many of the 250 in attendance at the Holiday Inn had already decided how they would vote on a June 9 referendum on a proposed Indian casino in Taunton, more than two-thirds raised their hands. And it was clear which side of the issue they came down on.
And the speakers may not have been completely honest in claiming impartiality. They poked the Mashpee Wampanoag, who want to build a $500 million resort casino on 145 acres at the junction of Routes 24 and 140 in East Taunton, for the promises made to the city.
Last week, the Mashpee released details of an Intergovernmental Agreement that would pay Taunton $33 million in upfront costs and up to $13 million a year as mitigation for hosting the casino. The City Council is considering that agreement in a meeting tonight.
But former Middleboro Selectman Adam Bond, who negotiated that community's agreement when the Mashpee proposed to build there in 2007, claimed the agreement was fraught with problems, ticking off a half dozen issues that he said should trouble Taunton residents.
"The agreement is full of loose ends that could cost taxpayers a lot of money," said Bond, an attorney now running for state representative.
In particular, Bond blasted the agreement's "good faith" provision to give jobs to Taunton residents. "'Good faith' is not sufficient," he said. "It's not about whether you trust the tribe; it's whether you write it into your agreement."
He also warned that the agreement did not mention that it would be conditional on the results of the referendum and could become binding with a vote of the City Council. "If you vote no, are they going to come anyway?" he asked.
Anthony LaCourse, chairman of Preserve Taunton's Future, called the city's agreement with the tribe "a strange reversal of the Manhattan transfer. We are the ones receiving trinkets and beads in exchange for the promise of a better future," he said.
Frank Dunphy, president of the anti-gaming casinofacts.org, warned residents not to be enticed by promised mitigation payments that wouldn't really benefit the city. For example, the tribe has promised money for road improvements, but "that's not money for Taunton," he said. "That's money to get patrons to the casino."
The state's new Expanded Gaming Act says a federally recognized tribe can be granted the casino license for Southeastern Massachusetts if, by July 31, it is able to obtain property, hold a referendum in the host community, negotiate a compact with the governor and have it approved by the Legislature and convince the State Gaming Commission that the land can be taken into trust by the federal government.
The Mashpee Wampanoag are in talks with the governor for a compact that would govern the operation of their proposed casino.
The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) is proposing a more modest development between Exits 8 and 9 off Route 140 in Freetown or Lake-ville. Earlier this week, it unveiled plans for the first phase of its resort casino, a $167 million facility on 50 of the 500 acres it controls in the two communities.
Voters in Freetown and Lakeville will be going to the polls on May 29 and June 2, respectively, to determine if they'd be willing to host the tribe's casino.
The Aquinnah are pushing the governor to negotiate a compact for the Freetown-Lakeville site but the state so far has refused, claiming the tribe gave up its gaming rights in a 1987 land agreement. The tribe is threatening to take the issue to federal court if the governor refuses to negotiate.
http://m.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20120524%2FNEWS%2F205240349&template=wapart
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment