Whenever I mention how the law was written by and for the casino industry, the rebuttal from proponents is usually along the lines of how the law can be changed. They're right of course and the despite being heavily weighted in favor of casino carpetbaggers, the laws are usually changed in their favor. This is just another such example. We don't know who owns a 20% interest in Caesars/SD and now we don't know if the balance of the group can pass a background check. Yet another EPIC FAILURE on the part of the people who are supposed to be representing our best interests.
Massachusetts Gaming Commission moves to eliminate requirement that communities must wait to hold casino ballot questions until commission's background checks completed
Members of the five-person Massachusetts Gaming Commission from left are: Enrique Zuniga, James F. McHugh, Chairman Steve Crosby, Bruce Stebbins and Gayle Cameron. (Photo by Josh Reynolds / Associated Press [file])
By
Follow on Twitter
on April 12, 2013
BOSTON — State gaming regulators are moving to eliminate a mandate that Springfield and other communities must wait to hold ballot questions on casino resorts until regulators finish background checks on casino applicants.
In a change of course, the five-member Massachusetts Gaming Commission said on Friday that it is set to approve an emergency regulation to allow a community to hold a referendum prior to the commission completing complex background investigations on casino developers. The commission had always previously insisted that background checks needed to be done before any vote.
Springfield had originally planned to hold a ballot question in June, but now that appears highly unlikely since no election can be held until at least 60 days after a community finalizes an agreement with a casino company. An agreement would need to be completed by April 25, for example, in order to hold a casino referendum on June 25, when the state's special U.S. Senate election will be held and turnout could be higher.
Kevin E. Kennedy, the chief development officer in Springfield, said Friday that it remains unknown when there would be a casino referendum vote in Springfield.
The city continues to negotiate with both MGM Resorts and Penn National Gaming, both competing for the casino license in Springfield.
Kennedy would not speculate if a host community agreement with a casino company would be ready by April 25, needed to have a June 25 referendum.
“Neither agreement is complete,” Kennedy said. “However, both are progressing very well. I can’t say where there would be a decision.”
An agreement with one firm, or both firms, would need to be approved by both Mayor Domenic J. Sarno and the City Council before one or both agreements could be forwarded for a citywide ballot vote.
Sarno had cooperated with the commission in September by agreeing to slow down the city's casino selection process to bring it into line with the commission's own timeline for approving casinos.
Now, the commission is proposing a new policy that could allow the city to move faster than the lengthy state process, which requires the companies and officers to pass investigations with possible appeals if they are found unsuitable.
Sarno declined comment, referring the matter for comment by Kennedy.
Kennedy declined comment on the Gaming Commission’s discussions.
Eleven gambling companies each paid $400,000 state application fee for the investigations, which are one part of a two-step bidding process by the commission and include operating officers and investors.
The MGM background investigation alone includes a group of 12 companies, including Dubai World, and billionaire Kirk Kerkorian and about 30 other key people who need to pass muster with the commission's investigative bureau and consultants.
Penn National's bid includes about 10 companies and about 20 individuals.
The commission's proposed emergency regulation, if approved, would give Springfield and other communities more control over the process for scheduling ballot questions on casinos. The commission's proposal would also take away a lot of uncertainty over the timing of a local vote since the commission is unable to guarantee when the background checks would be finished, possibly forcing cities and towns to delay votes.
According to state law, no casino can apply for a license until it is approved at the ballot in a community where it wants to locate.
Under the commission's proposed emergency regulation, a community's governing body would have to formally vote to approve to hold a ballot question before the commission determines a company's "suitability." The community would also have to hold a campaign – paid by the casino company – to notify voters that the vote would be held before the completion of the commission's background investigations and that companies would still need to clear that hurdle to apply for a license.
The commission is planning to vote to approve the emergency regulation on Thursday. People have until April 17 to e-mail the commission with comments. The commission is planning to award the first casino resort license possibly in February.
There are four big casino companies with plans in Western Massachusetts. MGM Resorts International and Penn National Gaming are planning casinos in the South and North ends of Springfield respectively.
Hard Rock International is planning a casino in West Springfield and the Mohegan Sun is planning a casino in Palmer.
Massachusetts approved a casino law in November 2011. The law allows for one slots parlor that could be anywhere and three casino resorts in different regions. One resort license is reserved for Western Massachusetts.
Under state law, according to Elaine Driscoll, spokeswoman for the commission, a community would need to finalize an agreement with a casino company before a ballot question. A vote can take place no sooner 60 days after an agreement is reached, she said, in order to give time for voters to weigh that agreement.
Communities usually are hesitant to hold elections in the summer when turnout could be hurt and many people are on vacation. That could mean most ballot questions would be held in the fall.
Staff writer Peter Goonan contributed.
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/04/massachusetts_gaming_commissio_17.html
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment