The Insanity of Expanded Gambling!

From our friends at NoPlainvilleRacino who also offered this:

Plainridge is a money loser: According to The Boston Globe, Plainridge was initially profitable but has become a money loser over the past five years, and needs the extra revenue that slot machines would generate to keep the facility afloat. Plainridge’s investors, namely a Las Vegas slot machine tycoon who owns 31% of the track, have pumped at least $32 million into the track over the past decade - and that may soon hit $35 million. Since then, each year has brought additional losses, with Plainridge’s backers subsidizing the money-losing operation as interest steadily dropped in live horse racing. How can we expect Plainridge to be successful with a highly complex slot operation if they cannot even make money with their current business venture? What has Plainridge's management been doing since the track opened - “We have been here for 14 years watching paint dry. This is getting exciting. This is light speed.” - says Gary Piontkowski, Plainridge Racecourse's President.


Illinois video comments worth seeing:

"Gambling is a JOB KILLER...A recent federal commission study indicated every slot machine [...] eats about $300,000 of LOST consumer spending from the economy, every year."

CHAMPAIGN--Supporters of a legalized gambling expansion bill that passed the Illinois Senate last week aren't celebrating quite yet. Governor Pat Quinn is strongly suggesting he won't sign the bill saying he objects to the lack of regulation measures. ABC Newschannel 15's Liz Lohuis stepped out of the world of politics and into the world of education to dig deeper into the issue of gambling.Gaming Expansion: Job Creator or Job Killer?
Monday, June 4 2012


http://www.wicd15.com/newsroom/top_stories/videos/wicd_vid_5329.shtml

Plainville: What are they afraid of?

The Pickles and misinformed prevailed in Plainville and the Boston Globe just commented!

The process in Plainville is reminiscent of Middleboro when town officials believed it appropriate to resort to name-calling and belittling Opponents.

And guess what? Those Opponents were RIGHT!

This is a race track that hasn't made money and is being subsidized.

Horse racing is DEAD! It's time to let it die a quiet death and stop taxpayer subsidies.

This from the area surrounding Aqueduct where Genting [the financial backers of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe] opened a Slot Barn:

Robberies are up 7% so far this year as compared to 2011 and grand larcenies have spiked 39%, the most current NYPD crime figures show.

http://middlebororemembers.blogspot.com/2012/06/is-aqueduct-faililng-to-protect-its.html 

 

Why would Plainville residents believe they're different?

 

What are the Plainville Board of Selectmen hiding? The TRUTH?

 

See also: Pickles Prevail in Plainville!

Plainville rejects anticasino group petition

By Jose Martinez

| Globe Correspondent June 07, 2012

Tempers flared at this week’s Town Meeting in Plainville over a petition urging selectmen to hire an outside consultant with no ties to the Plainridge Racecourse to study the pros and cons for the town should the state allow slot machines at the harness track.

The petition, presented by members of a local antigambling group, No Plainville Racino, was by far the most hotly debated measure during Monday’s four-hour Town Meeting.

After a half-hour of often terse discussion, the petition was defeated, 83-33, in the only vote of the night requiring a head count.

Town officials blasted the petition as redundant and insulting.

“There are all these inferences going around that we seem to be in Plainridge’s back pocket,” said Selectman Robert Rose. “Let me tell you something, I owe nothing to Plainridge.”

OH????

‘I am offended that the selectmen can’t understand that they should respect all of us who come to this meeting.’

‘Let’s call this what it is — this a maneuver by a group in town that doesn’t like any form of gambling.’

“I feel insulted, too,” said Selectwoman Andrea Soucy, the board’s chairwoman. “Plainridge has nothing to say about it.’’ The selectmen will choose a consultant, she said, “and when the whole thing is over, we will give Plainridge the bill. That is the only thing Plainridge is going to have to do with this study.”


Selectwoman Andrea Soucy launched into a personal Love Fest of Plainridge in violation of the Open Meeting Law while still sitting in her official capacity, refusing to excuse herself! Pity the poor woman who loves to have her ego stroked and refuses to abide by the law. Age might be a factor.



Plainridge Racecourse has notified the town of its intent to seek a Class 2 gaming license under the state’s new expanded gambling law, which calls for one slots-only venue along with a maximum of three full casino operations.

The legislation, passed last year, requires applicants to cover whatever expenses the host communities incur in drawing up required mitigation agreements.

If granted the license, Plainridge officials hope to add 1,250 slot machines to the track’s harness and simulcast racing operation as part of a $160 million makeover to the facility, which sits next to Route 1 and its interchange with Interstate 495.

Meanwhile, the state’s other horse-racing venue, Suffolk Downs, has unveiled a $1 billion plan to turn the thoroughbred track straddling East Boston and Revere into a full-scale casino resort.

Plainville residents on both sides of the gambling debate endured snickers and catcalls during their turns at the Town Meeting microphone Monday night.


How childish and disrespectful!

Marcia Benes called the atmosphere “poisonous.”

“As a citizen concerned about the welfare of this town, this community and what it is going to look like in the future, I want the selectmen to have an unbiased, neutral, and hopefully the best, most informative study that Plainridge’s money can buy, so they can do the negotiating on our behalf,” Benes said.

She went on to say that she opposed gambling as “damaging to society,” a comment that triggered such an uproar in the auditorium that Moderator Andrew Martin had to intervene.

“The selectmen said they are offended,” she continued, “and I am offended that the selectmen can’t understand that they should respect all of us who come to this meeting with different points of view. No one should be offended by requests for transparency in government.”

Some residents sought a middle ground on the polarizing issue.

“I think one thing we can all agree on is that money is tight,” said Steve Melanson. “The state’s passed a thing saying we have the possibility of getting a racino. Hire the consultant like you are doing and put it to a vote. This is a chance finally to get some income coming into our community instead of fighting over budgets. A little while ago we were talking about shutting down the Recreation Department.”

Ned Merrick, a retired Plainville police chief, minced no words in urging a no vote on the petition during his turn at the microphone.

“Let’s call this what it is — this a maneuver by a group in town that doesn’t like any form of gambling,” he said. “That’s fine, I get that. But don’t use us as your pawns.”

Merrick cited the likelihood the measure would be struck down as an illegal attempt by Town Meeting to order the Board of Selectmen to act, which he considers a violation of the separation of powers at the town level.  

[Too lazy to conduct his due diligence prior to Town Meeting! He's wrong! It's amazing what ignorance prevails unchallenged. A Citizens' Petition was accomplished in Middleboro that resulted in PUBLIC meetings, raising numerous issues that would not otherwise have been considered.]

“I’m not interested in getting a dope slap from the attorney general,” Merrick said.

Plainridge president Gary Piontkowski said the track had taken no position on the petition, and did not wish to comment on its defeat.

“That is the democratic process,” Piontkowski said. “We are going to follow the letter of the law. The town will too. There are a lot of bright people there and they are going to do what they have to do.”


Mr. Piontowski has attended most of the Massachusetts Gambling Commission meetings and is fully aware that this will be a 2-step process, unlike the Plainville Selectman or Town Manager.

Town Administrator Joseph Fernandes said the measure raised a moot point, since local officials have been planning to hire an outside consultant all along.

Ultimately, he said, Plainville residents would get the opportunity to vote on the host community agreement.

Fernandes said selectmen would discuss hiring a consultant at their meeting next week. He said he expects to begin soliciting bids for the study within weeks, and to have a consulting firm hired by mid-July.

Mr. Fernandes has discussed this matter with a tainted source!


Jennifer Crimmins Keen, who offered up an amendment to the original No Plainville Racino petition to require a public disclosure of how the consultant is chosen, later handed out fliers citing recent anticasino votes in Foxborough, Middleborough, Lakeville, and Freetown to residents filing out of the meeting.

“Slots are coming, dear,” one woman commented as she walked by.

Keen shook her head as she stood in the lobby of the Beatrice H. Wood School, just up the hall from the auditorium and gymnasium where the Town Meeting was winding down.

“Through these doors pass the greatest children in the world,” proclaimed a sign on the wall behind her.

“This school is a mile from the racino — the proposed racino,” Keen, a mother of two, said. “The kids take the bus and go right past it. They’ll go by it every day. I don’t get this town. All these other towns are voting this down. Maybe they care about their towns more than just the bottom line.”

Keen said the public criticism of her and the other members of No Plainville Racino has been grueling.

“I just got yelled at by the selectmen,” she said. “We weren’t trying to be insulting in any way. We just wanted to make sure they do it right.”

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/regionals/west/2012/06/06/plainville-rejects-anticasino-group-petition/Ys1QicNm0UXYIRPRqMwnaI/story.html

Pickles Prevail in Plainville!

The Massachusetts Gambling Commission will elect a 2 step process for granting licenses.

The first step will be submission of financial and background information for all potential license bidders. This process will eliminate several developers prior to the more expensive process of presenting detailed plans, investing in municipal agreements, the voting process and the expensive submission. A wise decision by the Commission!  

This process, at the most conservative, will take 9 months. After advertising, it was indicated that 3 months (90 days) will be provided for submission, then 6 months for review, after which there will be an appeal period.

Mr. Piontowski or his representatives have been at every Gambling Commission meeting.
Mr. Fernandes has NOT, so may be unaware of this matter. 
This reporter has also not attended the meetings.

Mr. Fernandes attended the Gambling Commission's Love Fest during which a great deal of carefully worded propaganda was offered.

Mr. Fernandes also attended the Boston Globe's Love Fest during which a great deal of carefully worded propaganda was offered. Mr. Fernandes even sought advice from the most egregious offender.

This conveniently ignores other communities that have opposed Predatory Gambling and their reasons for doing so, beginning with increased crime not only caused by Gambling Addiction, but also because of those it attracts.

I am a firm believer that those who oppose any position I adopt offer great insight into details I have overlooked. Instead, the Plainville Board of Pickles and town manager have adopted an arrogant position in which they seem to know best and are enamored of a business over the town's residents, even insulting and demeaning those who disagree.


It is interesting to note that Middleboro appointed a study committee composed of the town's residents that raised significant issues.

That was accomplished with a Town Meeting article submitted by citizens' petition.

For Plainville's Moderator to question the legality on Town Meeting floor instead of conducting his due diligence prior to the meeting is disappointing.

The Town of Palmer appointed a Casino Study Committee composed of its residents that determined that the annual cost to the town of a Slot Barn would be $18 million to $39 million, and also raised the expensive prospect of bringing water from the Quabbin.

Yet, it would seem Plainville's leadership is content to remain uninformed!

Plainville town meeting votes against slots study 

Posted: Tuesday, June 5, 2012

BY JIM HAND SUN CHRONICLE STAFFThe Sun Chronicle

PLAINVILLE - Town meeting Monday voted resoundingly against requring selectmen to have a cost-benefit analysis done on putting slot machines at Plainridge Racecourse, even though the board fully intends to have the study done anyway.
Proponents of the study may have hurt their own cause with suggestions that perhaps selectmen could not be trusted to have an objective study done.
Selectmen and voters said they took offense to the suggestion.

"That sense that we can't trust them, that's what I don't get," Town Treasurer Kathy Parker said.

The debate over the issue seemed to get off to a bad start when slot-machine opponent Jennifer Keen of Taunton Street said she wanted an independent study mandated so selectmen would not hire "someone recommended by Plainridge."

Town Administrator Joseph Fernandes and Selectmen Rob Rose and Andrea Soucy said they were insulted by the implication.

Rose said the proponents were suggesting he was "in the back pocket" of Plainridge, when his only desire "is to get the best package for the town."

Soucy said Plainridge

Gambling opponent Marcia Benes responded that there was a "poisonous atmosphere in this town" and "nobody should be offended by a request for transparency."

The request seemed to be hurt further by comments by Fernandes and Town Moderator Andrew Martin that the warrant article might not be legal because they believe town meeting cannot compel selectmen to do something.  

Someone needs to review the law!  

Martin, however, said he would leave it to the state attorney general to decide on the matter.
"I'm not interested in getting dope slapped by the attorney general," former Police Chief Ned Merrick, a supporter of the track, said in urging a vote against the item.

Some of the people who previously said that they supported the item ended up voting against it, and it went down to defeat, 83-33.

The original motion had widespread support going into town meeting, but the tone of the debate and an amendment requiring the study to be done separately from a "host community agreement" selectmen will negotiate with Plainridge dampened support.

Selectmen still intend to hire an outside consultant who will help with negotiations with the racetrack and determine whether revenue to the town from expanded gambling will outweigh the addition traffic and public safety demands slots will put on Plainville.

Fernandes said he will put together a request for proposal within a few weeks, then put the matter out to bid. Under state law, the consultant will be paid for by Plainridge.

Fernandes admits he does not have the expertise to handle the negotiations on his own.

If the agreement is approved by voters in a referendum, Plainridge would apply to the state for a
Class 2 gaming license allowing it to install 1,250 slot machines at the harness track.

The track intends to spend $125 million to upgrade its facilities if the license is granted.





http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/plainville-town-meeting-votes-against-slots-study/article_f0fd62c3-3706-5c60-91eb-3bb0bb3129f1.html

Why is no one asking? Slaughtering Horses and Pretense

The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.-Mahatma Ghandi

Horse Racing is DEAD! No one attends because the Racing audience is dying.

Yet there is pretense among politicians - even the Predatory Gambling legislation passed on Beacon Hill included taxpayer subsidies for the horse racing industry.

Gary Piontowski, small owner of Plainridge in Plainville pronounced the gazillion 1099 forms for racetrack sub-contractors.

Few noticed that those are not FULL TIME employees with benefits.

Few noticed that the track hasn't made $$$ and is subsidized, salivating for Slot Machines - taxpayer subsidies.

Horse racing should be allowed to die a peaceful death, much like the 8 track tape.

While horse slaughterhouses were banned in the U.S. in 2007, they are very much active in Canada. More than 100,000 horses, about 70% of them from the U.S., are being killed each year at Canadian slaughterhouses. Closing racetracks would push that number much higher.

Horse meat is shipped to Europe and Asia but you can find it in restaurants much closer to home.
The announcement to end the slots-at-racetracks program, which had been in place for more than a decade, came with words like “subsidy,” then “secret subsidy.” The Liberals said they were protecting health care, all-day kindergarten and care for our elderly.

It’s all a big pile of manure.

The slots program generates $1.1 billion annually for the OLG. Soon enough, there will be no money going back to the Ontario horse racing industry. It will be a bloody mess.

Years ago, on some nights the grandstand would be packed with fans watching the racing. On this night, there are maybe 100 people, clutching their racing programs, in the grandstand. They worry about things like exactors and triactors. A couple hundred more, maybe, are watching from the restaurant, digging into the $19.99 all-you-can-eat buffet.

From:

Trouble ahead for Ontario horse racing, trainer fears 

Monday, May 28, 2012

http://www.thewhig.com/2012/05/28/trouble-ahead-for-ontario-horse-racing-trainer-fears

As of December 2007, approximately 45,000 horses had been shipped to Mexico, compared to the 11,000 shipped in 2006. That’s a 310% increase in the number of horses shipped to Mexico to be slaughtered for human consumption.

The sad thing is that, not all of the horses are just old, sick or un-manageable horses. A lot of them are PMU horses and Nurse mare foals. Some of them are even back-yard pets, that have been stolen, strictly to make a buck or simply due to the over abundance of breeding horses.

There are basically two types of horse slaughter houses in Mexico. Municipal plants, that process for local consumption, and clandestine facilities. These are not regulated facilities. They are basically butcher shops with no regulation of how the horses are handled or euthanized.

IMPORTANT UPDATE! New statistics show that in 2010 there were over 112,000 horses slaughtered in North America. Approximately 53,000 in Mexico and 60,000 in Canada. For more information on this you should read this report from the Government Accountability Office.

---

I am going to be totally honest here. I have spent many a sleepless night, worrying about how I was going to write about the subject of horse slaughter. The thought of any animal suffering makes me sick.

I love my horses with all my heart, and I cannot imagine giving one of them up for slaughter. I would rather have them humanely euthanized, rather than to think that one of them might suffer, in order for someone overseas to dine on horse meat.

http://www.greenhorn-horse-facts.com/horse-slaughter.html

Welcome lively debate on Plainville racino

Smart people recognize that those with differing views often provide a perspective not consider.

It's nice to know there's someone in Plainville who hasn't consumed too much 'Slot Barn KoolAid' --

 

Welcome lively debate on Plainville racino

Saturday, May 19, 2012

 

To the editor: Re: "Racino foe would take bread off workers' tables" and "Final say on racino plan belongs to Plainville voters" (May 16):

Impressive level of Mary-Ann Greanier bashing in Wednesday's letters to the editor. If I don't like what Mary-Ann Greanier has to say, I don't have to listen or I am welcome to take the opposite position.

Regardless of my position compared to hers on important town issues, I always want to hear what she has to say as she is well informed and knowledgeable on municipal matters. In this case of expanding gambling, if Mary-Ann's call to arms is to ask her fellow townspeople to put pressure on the selectmen to thwart what she considers a threat to the character and quality of life in Plainville, then good for her.

Selectmen should welcome a lively debate from all sides of this very important issue then, utilizing their best judgment, vote and/or negotiate in the best interest of the town as a whole. Mary-Ann, please continue your crusade. I may or may not agree but I want to hear what you have to say.

Rick Hamilton, Plainville

 

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2012/05/19/opinion/11504637.txt

Unprofitable Race Track Waiting For Slots

Racetrack owners betting on slots approval

Gambling complex hinges on state OK

Horses and their drivers head around the track at Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville. (Jonathan Wiggs/Globe Staff/2009 File)

By Scott Van Voorhis

Globe Correspondent / January 27, 2011   

 

A Las Vegas slot machine tycoon and an array of other investors have pumped more than $32 million into the Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville during the past decade in hopes of seeing Beacon Hill legalize expanded gambling in the state.

 

The group — which includes Las Vegas-based Stanley Fulton, who made a fortune in the slot machine business, and former top Massachusetts racing industry regulator Gary Piontkowski — is preparing to double down on its bet.

Undeterred by the collapse last summer of gambling legislation at the State House, Piontkowski and his fellow investors in the Plainville racetrack are poised to make another push this year on Beacon Hill.

Piontkowski makes no bones about the fact that he and his fellow investors have long been interested in winning a green light to roll out slot machines at Plainridge.

But the group also shares ties that go beyond a desire to open a profitable slot machine complex, he said. Piontkowski noted that he and the track’s other two top investors — Fulton and local businessman Alfred Ross — are all avid horse racing fans as well.

Fulton, who could not be reached for comment, has spent untold amounts of money training horses, with three having made it all the way to the Kentucky Derby. Ross and Piontkowski are regulars on the racing scene as well.

On the table are plans for a $160 million-plus gambling complex that would feature slot machines, a 120- to 150-room hotel and, of course, the track.

“We are not just investors who invested for the sake of slot machines,’’ Piontkowski noted. “The three of us have either owned or trained racehorses.’’

The track’s roster of deep-pocketed investors has played a crucial role keeping the track afloat amid years of financial losses and bitter defeats at the State House.

While Piontkowski, chairman of the Massachusetts Racing Commission in the early 1990s, has become Plainridge’s public face over the years, its main financials backers are less well known.

Fulton is the largest single investor in the track, with a 31 percent stake, according to the Massachusetts State Racing Commission. He is a high-profile public benefactor in Las Vegas, having donated millions to the University of Nevada Las Vegas, where a building bears his name.

Fulton made more than $300 million when he sold his video slot and casino company in 2000. A horse racing enthusiast, Fulton opted to hang onto two racetrack investments — Sunland Park in New Mexico and Plainridge.

Fulton’s involvement in Plainridge dates back more than a decade, when an arm of his old company provided equipment to the racetrack.

Ross, a businessman based in South Dartmouth, is Plainridge’s second largest investor, with a 29.9 percent stake, state records show. He was previously part owner of the Twin River Casino in Rhode Island before it was sold to a British gambling firm in the 1990s.

Page 2 of 2 --

Ross, who has been involved in horse racing all his life, said a key to Plainridge’s future is whether the Legislature legalizes slot machines this year.

Plainridge was initially profitable but has become a money loser over the past five years, and needs the extra revenue that slot machines would generate to keep live racing afloat, he said. While simulcasting is profitable, running live races is not, he said.

He’s still optimistic state lawmakers will pass a gambling bill, but noted that years of failed proposals have taken their toll.

“I have been involved in racing in Massachusetts since 1955,’’ Ross said. “We had hoped to keep the harness game going. The whole situation is based on what happens on the hill.’’

Piontkowski has the third largest stake, with a 7.4 percent share in the track.

There are 15 additional investors with smaller shares in the track, mainly local businessmen, including Patrick Carney, head of a Bridgewater-based real estate company, Claremont Management.

Carney said he is willing to hang in longer, but his Plan B calls for redeveloping the track into a retail site with big-box stores.

“If we do get the go ahead, we could be up and running in the next three to six months,’’ said Carney, one of the smaller investors with a 1 percent share. “If this kept going on for another three years, I don’t know what we would do.’’

The gambling venture has cost the investors money over the years. Plainridge’s investors have pumped at least $32 million into the track over the past decade, Piontkowski noted. That number, in turn, may soon hit $35 million, he added.

The first big expense was developing the track more than a decade ago. Since then, each year has brought additional losses, with Plainridge’s backers subsidizing the money-losing operation as interest steadily dropped in live horse racing.

After the collapse last summer of gambling legislation, the track was forced to cut 160 employees and contract workers as losses for the track mounted and prospects for a major slot machine complex faded.

Yet despite the losses, Plainridge’s investors keep chipping into the pot.

The track and its backers are preparing to make their case all over again on Beacon Hill, with hopes of persuading the Legislature that a green light to roll out hundreds if not thousands of slot machines could prove to be a winner both for the track and the state.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo has pledged to push for a gambling bill again this year, with hopes for swift action early in the legislative session.

The decision to keep plunging ahead comes as the track’s investors have adjusted their expectations, according to Piontkowski.

The track and its investors had hoped to win approval for slot machines a decade ago, only to have their hopes dashed repeatedly after one gambling bill after another was defeated on Beacon Hill.

One of the hardest blows came last year, when the House and Senate agreed on a bill, but Governor Deval Patrick objected to putting slot machines at Plainridge and other racetracks.

But Piontkowski and other Plainridge investors see reason for hope. All three top state leaders favor some form of expanded gambling, a first for Massachusetts, and all look to be in power for the next few years.

Last year’s bill was by far the closest any gambling legislation had come to clearing the State House, Piontkowski said.

“We are still optimistic,’’ Piontkowski said. “The way I look at it, it’s one more increment each year. Each year we make it a little farther.’’

But other people hoping for a long-awaited start to casino style gambling in the state recognize the uncertainty in the bet that backers of gambling are placing.

Steve Norton is an investor with a group that owns a Palmer site on which Connecticut’s Mohegan Sun operation hopes to build a casino. He knows there is a bit of gambling going on among those who are hoping for a payoff when, and if, big time gambling comes to Massachusetts.

“We are in the gambling business and we have been known to take gambles ourselves,’’ Norton said.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/01/27/plainridge_racetrack_owners_betting_on_state_ok_on_expanded_gambling/

Note to Chairwoman Andrea Soucy: Please inform yourself of the LAW

Charitable Gambling was discussed during today's meeting of the Massachusetts Gambling Commission and the statute is CLEAR - simply written.

(The Gambling Commission is charged in the hastily passed legislation with 'reviewing' the statute.)

[Meeting minutes should be posted here shortly: http://www.mass.gov/gaming/]

MGL Chapter 271, Section 7A is the governing statute, found here:
http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter271/Section7A

Mr. Piontowski and his entourage were present during that meeting. Please take the time to enlighten yourself before you take any side in this issue that the Attorney General is currently investigating.

Chairwoman Andrea Soucy chose to defend something without researching the statute.

Read the law, learn the facts, inform yourself before choosing sides.

Gambling debate gets heated in Plainville

BY JIM HAND SUN CHRONICLE STAFF

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Track threatens to sue resident; claims made in track's charity raffle role

PLAINVILLE - The town's polite debate over expanded gambling at Plainridge Racecourse got a lot less civil Monday.


The track is now threatening to sue a local resident for defamation, while another resident contends the state attorney general is looking into an annual charitable raffle held by the track.


Taunton Street resident Thomas Keen told selectmen Monday a lawyer for the racetrack has sent him a cease and desist letter threatening to sue for defamation.


The issue involves a website and Facebook page he operates opposing proposed slot machine gambling at the Route 1 track.


In addition to information about gambling, he said he posted on Facebook a photograph of a man who recently broke into his house, hoping someone would recognize the suspect.

Another person wrote a comment under the photo, stating: "I wonder if they checked over at the racetrack. LOL."


The letter from the track's lawyer said the photo and comment are "objectionable, unprofessional and actionable."

Strong arm tactics by Mr. Piontowski?

The lawyer demanded that the "reckless" items be taken down and that Keen apologize. If he does not comply within 10 days, the track would file suit, the letter states.


Keen read the letter aloud at the selectmen's meeting.

He said later he just received the letter Monday, so he did not yet know what he would do, but suspects the track is trying to silence his opposition to the slot machine license it intends to apply for.

Was this Strong Armed Tactic necessary, especially when the comment didn't originate with Mr. Keen?

Town Administrator Joseph Fernandes said the issue has nothing to do with the town and selectmen should not comment.

Reached by phone after the selectmen's meeting, track President Gary Piontkowski said he has no problem with critics speaking out against his attempt to get a slot machine license for the track.

"This is America," he said, adding that he respects the right of people to disagree publicly.

However, he said he could not tolerate Keen trying to link a crime that had nothing to do with the track and the slot machine issue.

"To imply we're seedy people or criminals" goes too far, he said.

He said the posting hurts the reputation of his business, where there has never been an arrest.

The second track-related issue that blew up at the selectmen's meeting involved gambling opponent Mary-Ann Greanier claiming the track is operating a raffle in violation of state law.

She said the Attorney General's Office has been contacted.

Greanier got into a flare-up with selectmen Chairwoman Andrea Soucy when Soucy explained that the Lion's Club has been involved in the raffle with the track for years to raise money for local charities.  

She accused Soucy of being a "commercial" for the track. Greanier said only a charity or a non-profit agency can run a raffle, and the track is neither.

When elected officials take office, they receive a copy of the Open Meeting Law and sign an acknowledgement with the Town Clerk. It seems apparent that Selectwoman Soucy has not read the statute. Maybe it's time for her to do so before the Town ends up in really hot water.

Piontkowski said his track is "fully in compliance" and has been helping charities for 14 years.

The Plainville Lion's Club has the permit for the raffle and the track puts up the prizes, he said.

The raffle involves local organizations such as Plainville Athletic League selling tickets in conjunction with the Kentucky Derby, which the track airs on its simulcast televisions. Greanier said some parents involved with the athletic league object to selling raffle tickets related to gambling.

Piontkowski said the charities handle all the money. [which seems inconsistent with the statute]

As evidence of its legality, he said state racing commission officials have bought raffle tickets in the past. [Why would anyone purchasing a 'raffle ticket' research the issue? This seems a specious defense.]

The state Attorney General's Office called Plainville police after receiving a complaint about the raffle and the police came down to the track and were given all the records of the proceeds, he said.

Posted on the NoPlainvilleRacino facebook page:

NoPlainvilleRacino

Here is the letter I wrote in response to this morning's Sun Chronicle article about the selectmen's meeting- Mary-Ann:

The "flare up" between chairwoman Soucy and myself did not originate in our difference of opinion about the philan...thropic activities of Plainridge, but rather over Ms. Soucy's behavior in the selectmen's meeting ("Gambling debate gets heated in Plainville", Tuesday, April 24).

During an update regarding the response of the town to the impending application for slots at Plainridge, Ms. Soucy brought up the Plainridge Racecourse $10,000 Charity Give-Away drawing for Kentucky Derby wagers. She heard there had been a complaint to the Attorney General, so she invited Plainridge General Manager Steve O'Toole to talk about the raffle, the philanthropic activities of Plainridge, and how much money they have donated to town charities.

Mr. O'Toole said he could not speak about the raffle because of the complaint, but said he would take the opportunity to tell how much Plainridge does for the town.

When Ms. Soucy spoke about her own experience with the Lions and the raffle, I raised a point of order, asking Ms. Soucy if she was speaking as a private citizen or from her privileged position as chairwoman of the Plainville Board of Selectmen. She said she was speaking as a private citizen. I suggested she make that clear. She did not hand the gavel to another selectmen while giving her opinion, but continued to speak about Plainridge and the raffle. That is when I asked if she was doing a commercial for Plainridge, and then asked if she is familiar with the laws governing charity raffles in Massachusetts. She said she was not.

Ms. Soucy often goes off-agenda and off-topic at selectmen's meetings, rambling on with personal stories, opinions, and reminiscences. My frustration last night was that Ms. Soucy used her position as chair to bring up a topic not on the agenda, to express a private, unsolicited opinion, and to give preferential treatment to an individual business in town.

In the future, I would ask Ms. Soucy to adhere to the open meeting laws of Massachusetts and not veer off the agenda to suit her own purposes. If she cannot do that, I would suggest she step down as chair and allow one of the other selectmen to run the meetings.

Also, for the record, I did not say that Plainridge is in violation of the law; simply that there were enough questions about the raffle to make enquiries. Apparently the AG agreed, as they are investigating the raffle.

Mary-Ann Greanier

For those too lazy to click the link, the text of the Law:

Section 7A. In this section the following words shall have the following meanings:

“Raffle”, an arrangement for raising money by the sale of tickets, certain among which, as determined by chance after the sale, entitle the holders to prizes.

“Bazaar”, a place maintained by the sponsoring organization for disposal by means of chance of one or both of the following types of prizes: (1) merchandise, of any value, (2) cash awards, not to exceed twenty-five dollars each.

Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, raffles and bazaars may be promoted, operated and conducted under permits issued in accordance with the provisions of this section.

No organization, society, church or club which conducts a raffle or bazaar under the provisions of this section shall be deemed to have set up and promoted a lottery and nothing in this chapter shall authorize the prosecution, arrest or conviction of any person connected with the operation of any such raffle or bazaar; provided, however, that nothing contained in this section shall be construed as permitting the game commonly known as “beano” or any similar game regardless of name.

No raffle or bazaar shall be promoted, operated or conducted by any person or organization, unless the same is sponsored and conducted exclusively by (a) a veterans’ organization chartered by the Congress of the United States or included in clause (12) of section five of chapter forty of the General Laws; (b) a church or religious organization; (c) a fraternal or fraternal benefit society; (d) an educational or charitable organization; (e) a civic or service club or organization; and (f) clubs or organizations organized and operated exclusively for pleasure, recreation and other nonprofit purposes, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any member or shareholder. Such organization shall have been organized and actively functioning as a nonprofit organization in the commonwealth for a period of not less than two years before it may apply for a permit. The promotion and operation of the raffle or bazaar shall be confined solely to the qualified members of the sponsoring organization and no such member shall receive remuneration in any form for time or effort devoted to the promotion or operation of such raffle or bazaar. All funds derived from any raffle or bazaar shall be used exclusively for the purposes stated in the application of the sponsoring organization which purposes shall be limited to educational, charitable, religious, fraternal or civic purposes or for veterans’ benefits. An organization which meets the qualifications required by this section and which desires to conduct or operate a raffle or bazaar within the commonwealth shall apply for a permit to conduct raffles and bazaars from the clerk of the city or town in which the raffle will be drawn or the bazaar held. The application form shall be approved by the commissioner of public safety and shall include the name and address of the applicant, the evidence on which the applicant relies in order to qualify under this section, the names of three officers or members of the organization who shall be responsible for the operation of the raffle or bazaar, and the uses to which the net proceeds will be applied. Unless otherwise established in a town by town meeting action and in a city by city council action, and in a town with no town meeting by town council action, by adoption of appropriate by-laws and ordinances to set such fees, a fee of ten dollars shall accompany each such application and shall be retained by the city or town, but in no event shall any such fee be greater than fifty dollars. Upon receipt of such application, the clerk shall determine whether it is in conformity with this section. If the clerk so determines, he shall forward the application to the chief of police of the city or town, who shall determine whether the applicant is qualified to operate raffles and bazaars under this section. If the chief of police so determines, he shall endorse the application and return it to the clerk, who shall forthwith issue a permit, which shall be valid for one year from the date of its issuance. The clerk shall retain a copy of the application and shall send a copy to the commissioner of public safety. If there is any change in the facts set forth in the application for a permit subsequent to the making of such application, the applicant shall forthwith notify the authority granting such permit of such change, and such authority shall issue such permit if the applicant is qualified, or, if a permit has already been issued and the change in the facts set forth in the application disqualify the applicant revoke such permit.

If an application is not acted upon within thirty days after it is submitted, or if the organization is refused a permit, or if a permit is revoked, any person named on the application may obtain judicial review of such refusal or revocation by filing within ten days of such refusal or revocation or within ten days of the expiration of such thirty day period a petition for review in the district court having jurisdiction in the city or town in which such application was filed. A justice of said court, after a hearing, may direct that such permit be issued, if he is satisfied that there was no reasonable ground for refusing such permit, and that the applicant was not prohibited by law from holding raffles or bazaars.

An organization issued a permit under this section shall within thirty days of the expiration of its permit submit a report on a form to be approved by the commissioner of public safety. Such form shall require information concerning the number of raffles and bazaars held, the amount of money received, the expenses connected with the raffle or bazaar, the names of the winners of prizes exceeding twenty-five dollars in value, the net proceeds of the raffles and bazaars, and the uses to which the net proceeds were applied. The organization shall maintain and keep such books and records as may be necessary to substantiate the particulars of such report, which books and records shall be preserved for at least one year from the date of such report and shall be available for inspection. Such report shall be certified to by the three persons designated in the permit application as being responsible for such raffle or bazaar and by an accountant. Two copies of said report shall be filed with city or town clerk. The clerk shall send one copy to the commissioner of public safety. Failure to file said report shall constitute sufficient grounds for refusal to renew a permit to conduct raffles or bazaars. The fee for renewal of such permit shall be ten dollars.

The authority granting any permit under this section shall immediately revoke the same for a violation of any provision of this section and shall not issue any permit to such permittee within three years from the date of such violation. Any person aggrieved by the action of such authority revoking such permit may appeal to the district court having jurisdiction in the city or town where the permit was issued; provided that such appeal shall be filed in such court within twenty days following receipt of notification by said authority. The court shall hear all pertinent evidence and determine the facts and upon the facts so determined annul such action or make such decision as equity may require. The foregoing remedy shall be exclusive.

Any organization conducting or operating a raffle or bazaar under this section shall file a return with the state lottery commission, on a form prepared by it, within ten days after the raffle or bazaar is held and shall pay therewith a tax of five per cent of the gross proceeds derived from such raffle or bazaar.

All sums received by said commission from the tax imposed by this section as taxes, interest thereon, fees, penalties, forfeitures, costs of suits or fines, less all amounts refunded thereon, together with any interest or costs paid on account of such refunds, shall be paid into the treasury of the commonwealth.

Whoever violates any provision of this section or submits false information on an application or report required under this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than one year, or both.

No person who prints or produces tickets, cards or any similar article used in the conduct of a bazaar or raffle pursuant to a permit issued under the provisions of this section shall be subject to any penalty therefor, provided that a certified copy of such permit was presented to him prior to his undertaking to print or produce such tickets or cards.

No organization issued a permit under this section shall conduct more than three bazaars in any single calendar year nor shall such organization conduct more than one bazaar in any single calendar day. The operation of a bazaar shall be limited to five consecutive hours.

Plainville: Wow! What a version!

Wow! This clearly isn't the same meeting I heard about!

This ignores the Open Meeting Law violations.

STREET BEAT: Plainridge slots stir traffic concerns
http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2012/04/23/plainville/11346340.txt

Impact on roads, not gambling key to some racecourse neighbors

BY JIM HAND SUN CHRONICLE STAFF

PLAINVILLE - Patty Snow estimates the distance between her house and Plainridge Racecourse to be about the length of a football field.

Her Haynes Road home is one of the closest to the back of the Route 1 racetrack.

But Snow said she sometimes forgets the track is there. She can't see it from her house and she only hears a faint noise from the track on summer nights when the windows are open.

So Snow said she doesn't object to the track applying for a state license to operate slot machines. Plainridge has been a good neighbor over the years, she said.

She said she's not crazy about gambling, but figures if the state is going to allow it, Plainville might as well get the revenue that would come from Plainridge winning the license.

"I'm kind of for it because the town needs the revenue," she said despite living in the neighborhood closest to the track.

Although there is no outward sign of resistance to slot machines in the neighborhood, one concern by homeowners is traffic.

Some homeowners said they fear motorists might use adjacent Mirimichi Street as a shortcut to avoid traffic lights on Route 1 that the track is proposing to install.

"I think it's a bad thing," Nancy Kraby of Haynes Road said of the slot machine proposal. "I think it will increase traffic. We already have Lowe's and Target and the racetrack."

Elizabeth White, who said she can see the track from her backyard, also said she is concerned about increased traffic.

An opposition group has formed in Plainville, led by Mary-Ann Greanier of Mirimichi Street, but so far the organization is small.

Greanier said she is opposed to gambling on principle. But, if slot machines get approved at Plainridge, she wants the town to drive a hard bargain to make sure the revenues gained outweigh the costs.

Plainridge President Gary Piontkowski said he believes the fears about traffic in the neighborhood are unfounded. [Hmmmm...except these have been expressed previously.]

He said the track intends to spend $5 million making improvements to Route 1. The proposed improvements include traffic lights at the track and the intersection with Interstate 495. There would also be left-turn lanes into the property from Route 1 South. [And...Oh! BTW! Did anyone ask about the timing of the 'traffic survey' conducted during a slow time of the year? Been there! Done that!]
Piontkowski said he cannot imagine why someone would use Mirimichi Street - a narrow, winding road - as a shortcut because it is not a shorter or quicker drive.

Plainridge, he said, has been a good neighbor and even owns about 12 empty house lots on Haynes Road.

There has never been an arrest at the track in 14 years of operation and the only noise comes during the 24 minutes of live racing during harness season, he said. [Phew!]
"We don't think slot machines will have an impact on the neighborhood at all," he said. [Oh? Wonder why studies prove otherwise?]

Plainville: The Blind being led

Combine one poor reporter and an uninformed Board of Selectmen and what do you get? [That reporter commented that the Foxborough Follies would attract foreign whales. Yeah! Right! And I have a PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE TO NOWHERE to sell.]

This is town leadership that was so fully uninformed about an industry about to steamroll them, that it wasn't until a concerned citizen shared widely available reports, that they were roused from their slumber.

And the lackluster board is at a loss and left stuttering about how to conduct an Independent Cost Benefit Analysis, such as other venues have done.

The names that were mentioned during a recent Plainville BOS meeting displayed their ignorance, one a widely known Casino Shill on the payroll of the Gambling Industry.

The citizens of the small town of Palmer determined that the annual cost to host a Gambling Monstrosity would be $19 MILLION to $39 MILLION. The logic seems lost on Plainville.

And bethcha they haven't read the INDEPENDENT COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS from New Hampshire or even meandered onto one of the informational sites such as United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts.

The Plainville BOS is easily led into bankruptcy and schmoozed by another Snake Oil Salesman.

Group wants take on racino costs
BY JIM HAND SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
Saturday, April 7, 2012

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Slot machine foes fight Plainridge plans
PLAINVILLE - A citizens group opposed to slot machines at Plainridge Racecourse is asking that the town have a cost-benefit analysis done on gambling, but selectmen say they already intend to hire an expert to do the study.

The new group, "No Plainville Racino," is fighting a plan to bring about 1,250 slot machines to Plainridge.

The track has made clear it intends to apply for a state slot machine parlor or racino license, and has asked selectmen to start negotiating a local agreement.

Jennifer Crimmins Keen of Taunton Street said the group is opposed to a racino, but if one gets approved the group wants to make sure it's a good deal for the town.

A cost-benefit analysis would help determine if the expected revenue to the town from gambling would outweigh the cost of additional police and fire services, along with traffic and social problems, she said. "We want to make sure the town gets its fair share," she said.

The group has submitted a petition asking for a town meeting vote to approve a cost-benefit analysis.

The proposal reads:

"To see if the town will vote to require the board of selectmen to obtain an independent cost-benefit analysis about the impact of a slot machine parlor on the residents of Plainville. This analysis would be obtained prior to and-or concurrent with negotiations for a host community agreement for a Class 2 gaming license in Plainville, and made public prior to any town-wide referendum on any host community agreement."

But, selectmen Chairman Rob Rose said the board already plans to have such a study done.

He said Town Administrator Joseph Fernandes is talking to academics who have studied the gambling industry, asking advice on how to find a consultant to do the work for the town. "Basically, that is the whole crux of what is going to happen," he said.





Rose said a request for proposals will be published asking consultants to apply for the work.

The consultant will be paid for through Plainridge funds.

Keen said the group will also hold an open house April 29 at the senior center to provide residents with information about the impact of a racino.

She said the group fears that most residents consider the racino "a done deal" before it has been learned what kind of jobs gambling will provide and what negative impact it could have on the town.

Plainridge has opened a public information office on South Street to provide residents with information about its proposal, including plans to build a parking garage and larger facility.

Track President Gary Piontkowski said he intends to be as open as possible with residents as the application process progresses.

Plainville: Growing Opposition!

The only ones getting rich from Slot Barns are the investors!

Anti-racino group ramps up opposition
Friday, April 6, 2012

PLAINVILLE - Some local residents are stepping up their efforts to block a proposal to bring slot machines to Plainridge Racecourse.

The group called No Plainville Racino on Thursday submitted a petition to have the June 4 town meeting require an independent cost benefit analysis of the impact of adding slot machines to the Route 1 harness racing track.

In addition, the group is planning an open house from 3 to 6 p.m. Sunday, April 29 at the Plainville Senior Center, where information about the slot machine proposal will be distributed. It has also set up a website (noplainvilleracino.com) and Facebook page (facebook.com/NoPlainvilleRacino).

In a statement issued today, the group said it was spurred to action when Plainridge President Gary Piontkowski last month initiated discussions with the board of selectmen to bring the "racino" - a race track with slot machines - to Plainville. According to the law passed last year by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Deval Patrick, businesses interested in pursuing one of the three casino licenses or the single racino license to be issued by the state must first sign an agreement with the host community.

Plainridge is the first business in the state to pursue one of the licenses. The agreement would have to be approved by the voters of Plainville and by the state's newly-formed gambling commission. Jennifer Crimmins Keen, one of several founders of the group and a former Foxboro resident now living in Plainville with her husband and two sons, said in the statement, "The competition from Rhode Island and Connecticut gaming facilities, especially the Rhode Island slot parlor just 15 miles away that's adding gaming tables at taxpayers' expense; the cannibalizing of the local retail market; the influx of workers and their families who will have low-wage, dead-end jobs with no benefits; and the loss of Lottery funds to our schools are only a few of our concerns. We have dozens of unanswered questions."

Keen's sister, Stephanie Crimmins, is among the leaders of a more vocal group opposing a proposal by Las Vegas magnate Steve Wynn to build a $1 billion resort casino across from Gillette Stadium in Foxboro.

Plainville: Little noticed

During the March 26th Plainville Selectmen's meeting, little noticed was the statement by Mr. Piontowski that a traffic survey was currently underway.

It should be noted that this seems to be a light travel period, surely not considering the Patriots' games in Foxborough. Hmm.....

When the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe conducted a traffic survey on Route 44, it was done during a winter vacation, a period during which the road was close to deserted, not during the summer vacation gridlock.



Months to go for Plainridge negotiations
BY JIM HAND SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
March 27, 2012

PLAINVILLE - It could be months before the town is ready to start negotiating with Plainridge Racecourse over the track's proposal to bring 1,250 slot machines to the Route 1 facility.

Selectmen told track officials Monday a slot-machine agreement has never been negotiated in state history, so there is no blueprint for them to follow.

Board Chairman Robert Rose said he's so concerned about the issue that he got out of bed at 3 a.m. Saturday and started emailing questions to the new state gaming commission.

The commission has just formed and does not have a staff yet. Rose said the commissioners told him they have not yet written regulations for issuing slot machine or casino licenses.

Rose told track officials selectmen will need to know a lot more about the issue before getting into the thick of negotiations. "It's going to be some time before we can kick this off," he said.

Applicants for gaming licenses are required by a new state law to negotiate an agreement with the city or town where they intend to locate. The community must then approve of the agreement in a referendum before the applicant can apply for a state license.

Plainridge President Gary Piontkowski said the track intends to be transparent in the application process and will provide any information the town requests.

He said the track has opened a public information office and has offered office space to the opposition. He said he just hopes the debate stays focused on facts because he's seen some comments get personal.

Several residents attended the selectmen's meeting to express opposition to the slot machine proposal and to ask that the board hold public hearings so they can make their views known.

"I guarantee you there will be public hearings," Selectmen Robert Fennessy said. One of the organizers of the opposition, Mary-Ann Greaner, said a group has formed called "NoPlainvilleRacino.com."

She said the group has about 10 members so far from both Plainville and nearby towns.

Resident TJ Keen noted that Plainridge has lost money the past several years and asked what would happen to the property if it failed to get a slot machine license.

Piontkowski said the track has about 100 acres of land and it can be developed for other purposes if it does not get the license.

The residents also asked how much tax revenue the town could expect from the development of a slot machine parlor at Plainridge.

Town Administrator Joseph Fernandes said the state law requires the track to spend $125 million in improvements to its facility, so that would amount to $1.5 million to $2 million in property taxes for Plainville.

Not quite true as this article highlights: Caesars, Atlantic City settle tax appeal

He also said the process of negotiating an agreement with Plainridge will be a complicated one, and repeated that he believes the town should hire a consultant who has expertise to help with the process.

He said he wants to put out a request for proposals from potential consultants so the town can find the best one.

Piontkowski said state law requires the applicant to pay for the town consultant.

Plainville: One Lost Real Estate Deal Already!

As real estate prices plummet at the prospect of having a 7 story parking garage overshadow your home in Plainville, one property owner indicated that a prospective buyer called Plainville Town Hall and was assured that the Plainridge Slot Barn was a "Done Deal! Inevitable!"

Hmmm....where have we heard that before? Oh! Wait! We heard that in Middleboro from the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and Scott Ferson.....we're still waiting! Memory fades...has it been 5 years?

During the Plainville Board of Selectmen's meeting, Mr. Piontowski shovelled a lot a manure [meaning 'what a great neighbor we've been!'] to be expected, largest taxpayer, blah, blah, blah....although facts seem to prove otherwise.

When one abutter to the current track raised the issue that Mr. Piontowski AKA Plainridge was initially approved, the plans called for a berm to be constructed to shield his property, never done. In addition, the lights from the track shine directly onto this man's property, his deck to be specific.

If Mr. Piontowski were the honorable businessman he represents himself to be, his response MIGHT have been "Give me your name and number and we'll call and get it resolved tomorrow."

Come on now. Dark sky lighting and other such issues are zoned elsewhere, though not in Plainville. This is not re-inventing the wheel and is easily corrected.


Not so Mr. Piontowski!

Instead, Mr. Piontowski departed from his "Good Neighbor Script," his ego went into overdrive and insisted that he had never met the man, had never spoken to him, although others say different. [His nose did seem to get longer as he spoke.]

Maybe I've seen too many true "Good Neighbors" from attending all of these meetings.

And that berm? Seems the buddies on the Planning Board erased it. Hey! Come on! Biggest taxpayer? Why should he accommodate a lowly homeowner?

The Board of Selectmen seemed to swoon at the concept of +$1 million in new taxes. I noticed that tell-tale dreamy look in their eyes, just the thought of all the ways to spend that money. Makes you a little wistful.

I guess they haven't read the Palmer Study Committee Report that indicated the ANNUAL costs to the Town of Palmer would be $18 MILLION to $39 MILLION, not including ~ $50 MILLION to bring water from the Quabbin.

Spare no expense for your "Good Neighbor" !

Just bring your bucket and shovel along.

From the "Oh! Please Department!"

Comparing behavior on Beacon Hill to a vultures' feeding frenzy is clearly unjust to the vultures whose behavior is necessitated by survival.

The Beacon Hill Frenzy is caused by greed, the quest for power and disregard for the electorate - the Common Wealth.

There is no Regulatory Hack-O-Rama in place to rubber stamp SLOT BARN licenses and predictions are that it will require 18 months to hire political hacks and relatives to adequately staff that BLOATED BUREAUCRACY that will cost taxpayers millions.

For Piontowski to sacrifice employees is disingenuous, to say the least.


Speaker Robert DeLeo declared the critical-condition gambling bill still breathing Tuesday morning, as Plainridge Racecourse laid off 157 workers and blamed Gov. Deval Patrick’s refusal to support racetrack slot machines.

DeLeo said Patrick’s decision to send expanded gambling legislation back with an amendment effectively killed the prospect of 15,000 jobs [NOT SO!], but on Tuesday morning said the bill is not dead though its prospects are “very difficult.”

To continue to promote false job claims is beyond dishonest.

It's time for reasonable people to insist on an INDEPENDENT COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS.

Brown: Another Republican Supporting Big Government

Slot Parlors epitomize failed fiscal policy and Big Government expansion.

Republican Senator Scott Brown easily discards Republican platforms opposing Big Government and taxpayer subsidies for profitable businesses when it comes to wealthy friends and campaign donors, it seems.

Where in this conversation is anyone asking what that BLOATED REGULATORY BUREAUCRACY will cost?

If a federal report determined that for every $1 in tax revenue provided by casino gambling, the cost to taxpayers was $3, surely the prudent thing would be for Republicans to insist on an Independent Cost Benefit Analysis, but then Massachusetts Republicans have been fraudulent in their opposition as well.

Brown pressed Senate leader on slots

Senator Scott Brown has lobbied both Governor Deval Patrick and Senate President Therese Murray to legalize slot machines at the state’s race tracks, according to the governor and a legislative official on Beacon Hill, advocacy that would benefit a longtime Brown friend and campaign donor.

Brown called Murray in April, shortly after the House passed a bill allowing slots at the race tracks, to voice his support and suggested that the Legislature authorize 1,500 slot machines at each track, according to a legislative official familiar with the call.




Revolving Door Trivia, from SHNS:

...if gaming comes in and we're not included, that's kind of a suicide mission.” [Gary] Piontkowski, a former state racing commission chair, said the track would probably bid for a casino license.