Yes, Mr. Nunes, ‘ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL’…..and OUR local has nothing to do with a '50 mile radius!'
We are neighbors, friends and families..... ALL WITHIN the bounds of Milford and we will overwhelmingly “vote the way Milford votes” as you say, by showing you AND Foxwoods the door on November 19th!!
Milford casino: Then there were two
By Lindsay Corcoran/Daily News staff
Posted Nov 07, 2013
MILFORD —
Only one proposal – and a referendum vote – now stands between the Foxwoods casino proposal in Milford and a license from the state after Tuesday’s vote on Suffolk Downs.
Voters in East Boston, who along with Revere headed to the polls on Tuesday, rejected the plan for a casino at the Suffolk Downs racetrack by a margin of 56 percent to 44 percent.
The vote likely eliminated the Suffolk Downs proposal since the state’s gaming law, passed in 2011, requires a favorable host community vote.
Officials at Suffolk Downs say they are “reassessing” their options and Revere’s mayor has called on the casino developers to re-shape the plan so it is located only in his city. It was not immediately clear if such a change could pass muster with the gaming commission, however, as Chairman Stephen Crosby told the State House News Service that "they just hadn't thought about that."
Chief Operating Officer David Nunes, who along with Foxwoods and other partners has proposed a $1 billion, 980,000-square-foot resort-casino at the intersection of Interstate 495 and Rte. 16 in Milford, said vote on Suffolk Downs has little effect on the Milford project.
“I don’t think it has any effect on us, other than to say that it's one less horse in the race and that obviously improves Milford’s chances,” Nunes said. “But we still need to prove to Milford on Nov. 19 and the subsequent Town Meeting that it’s the right opportunity for the town.”
Casino-Free Milford sees the result from East Boston as a sign that they can be victorious in voting down the Foxwoods proposal on Nov. 19.
“I see this as quite encouraging,” said co-chairman of the group, John Seaver. “I see it as two more communities (including the vote in Palmer) voting to protect their communities from all the negative impacts.” Palmer residents Tuesday voted down a casino proposal by Mohegan Sun by less than 100 votes. Supporters there have asked for a recount.
Seaver said looking at other communities across the state, like West Springfield, Tewksbury and Foxborough, which have all defeated casino proposals, he thinks it’s likely Milford will vote no, too.
“The real message is that communities that the oppose a casino can vote it down,” Seaver said.
Nunes said he doesn’t think the results from Tuesday’s elections shed any light on how Milford residents will cast their ballots on Nov. 19.
“I think that campaigns are all local and all politics is local,” Nunes said. “I’m going to rely upon Milford as being its own entity and voting the way Milford votes.”
We are neighbors, friends and families..... ALL WITHIN the bounds of Milford and we will overwhelmingly “vote the way Milford votes” as you say, by showing you AND Foxwoods the door on November 19th!!
MILFORD —
Only one proposal – and a referendum vote – now stands between the Foxwoods casino proposal in Milford and a license from the state after Tuesday’s vote on Suffolk Downs.
Voters in East Boston, who along with Revere headed to the polls on Tuesday, rejected the plan for a casino at the Suffolk Downs racetrack by a margin of 56 percent to 44 percent.
The vote likely eliminated the Suffolk Downs proposal since the state’s gaming law, passed in 2011, requires a favorable host community vote.
Officials at Suffolk Downs say they are “reassessing” their options and Revere’s mayor has called on the casino developers to re-shape the plan so it is located only in his city. It was not immediately clear if such a change could pass muster with the gaming commission, however, as Chairman Stephen Crosby told the State House News Service that "they just hadn't thought about that."
Chief Operating Officer David Nunes, who along with Foxwoods and other partners has proposed a $1 billion, 980,000-square-foot resort-casino at the intersection of Interstate 495 and Rte. 16 in Milford, said vote on Suffolk Downs has little effect on the Milford project.
“I don’t think it has any effect on us, other than to say that it's one less horse in the race and that obviously improves Milford’s chances,” Nunes said. “But we still need to prove to Milford on Nov. 19 and the subsequent Town Meeting that it’s the right opportunity for the town.”
Casino-Free Milford sees the result from East Boston as a sign that they can be victorious in voting down the Foxwoods proposal on Nov. 19.
“I see this as quite encouraging,” said co-chairman of the group, John Seaver. “I see it as two more communities (including the vote in Palmer) voting to protect their communities from all the negative impacts.” Palmer residents Tuesday voted down a casino proposal by Mohegan Sun by less than 100 votes. Supporters there have asked for a recount.
Seaver said looking at other communities across the state, like West Springfield, Tewksbury and Foxborough, which have all defeated casino proposals, he thinks it’s likely Milford will vote no, too.
“The real message is that communities that the oppose a casino can vote it down,” Seaver said.
Nunes said he doesn’t think the results from Tuesday’s elections shed any light on how Milford residents will cast their ballots on Nov. 19.
“I think that campaigns are all local and all politics is local,” Nunes said. “I’m going to rely upon Milford as being its own entity and voting the way Milford votes.”
Voters in East Boston, who along with Revere headed to the polls on Tuesday, rejected the plan for a casino at the Suffolk Downs racetrack by a margin of 56 percent to 44 percent.
The vote likely eliminated the Suffolk Downs proposal since the state’s gaming law, passed in 2011, requires a favorable host community vote.
Officials at Suffolk Downs say they are “reassessing” their options and Revere’s mayor has called on the casino developers to re-shape the plan so it is located only in his city. It was not immediately clear if such a change could pass muster with the gaming commission, however, as Chairman Stephen Crosby told the State House News Service that "they just hadn't thought about that."
Chief Operating Officer David Nunes, who along with Foxwoods and other partners has proposed a $1 billion, 980,000-square-foot resort-casino at the intersection of Interstate 495 and Rte. 16 in Milford, said vote on Suffolk Downs has little effect on the Milford project.
“I don’t think it has any effect on us, other than to say that it's one less horse in the race and that obviously improves Milford’s chances,” Nunes said. “But we still need to prove to Milford on Nov. 19 and the subsequent Town Meeting that it’s the right opportunity for the town.”
Casino-Free Milford sees the result from East Boston as a sign that they can be victorious in voting down the Foxwoods proposal on Nov. 19.
“I see this as quite encouraging,” said co-chairman of the group, John Seaver. “I see it as two more communities (including the vote in Palmer) voting to protect their communities from all the negative impacts.” Palmer residents Tuesday voted down a casino proposal by Mohegan Sun by less than 100 votes. Supporters there have asked for a recount.
Seaver said looking at other communities across the state, like West Springfield, Tewksbury and Foxborough, which have all defeated casino proposals, he thinks it’s likely Milford will vote no, too.
“The real message is that communities that the oppose a casino can vote it down,” Seaver said.
Nunes said he doesn’t think the results from Tuesday’s elections shed any light on how Milford residents will cast their ballots on Nov. 19.
“I think that campaigns are all local and all politics is local,” Nunes said. “I’m going to rely upon Milford as being its own entity and voting the way Milford votes.”
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment