Meetings & Information




*****************************
****************************************************
MUST READ:
GET THE FACTS!






Showing posts with label Hard Rock. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hard Rock. Show all posts

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Ohio Defunding Host Communities


The article at the bottom goes far beyond PREDATORY GAMBLING, IMPACTS and the costs to HOST COMMUNITIES.

This defines the Failed Fiscal Policies.....

How Ohio Pulled $4 Billion+ from Communities and Redistributed It Upwards


Ohio: Poster Child for Mindless Global Self-Destruction

 


Racino communities looking to governor for payment plan



When the governor vetoed a legislative proposal to provide $500,000 each to Austintown and Dayton for hosting racinos, we thought he would lay out his ideas for the payments in the executive biennium budget he submitted to the Ohio General Assembly earlier this month.

But much to our surprise, Gov. John Kasich’s budget makes no mention of the racino communities.

Thus, we, along with Austintown Township officials, state Rep. Ronald Gerberry of Austintown, D-59th, and Senate Minority Leader Joe Schiavoni of Boardman, D-33rd, wonder if the governor has had a change of heart, or if there’s a hitch.

Last December, Kasich vetoed an amendment that would have required Penn National Gaming to pay $250,000 to each community, with the other $250,000 coming from the $150 million Penn National will be paying into a special fund over the next 10 years.

The governor contended that Penn National should be responsible for the entire amount, and then he went a step further: He said that four other communities that host racinos, North Randall, Northfield, Lebanon and Cincinnati, must also receive annual payments from the owners of the gaming facilities.

Excluded from his plan is Franklin County, which is home to Scioto Downs Racino. Hollywood Casino Columbus already is paying the county government.

In addition to Penn National, other gaming companies operating in Ohio are Rock Ohio Caesars, MTR Gaming, Hard Rock International, Miami Valley Gaming and Pinnacle Entertainment.

We praised the governor for coming up with a fair solution, but Gerberry issued a warning at the time that may be coming to pass.

Here’s what the veteran legislator said in the wake of Kasich’s action:



“I’m just hopeful that the persuasion of the governor’s office is very strong in 2015 on the majority party of the Senate.

The reason that this is not getting done is that there are some folks in the majority that believe that the host racino communities shouldn’t be paid $500,000 a year, and they’ve been able to stop it.

That’s unfortunate.”

We were skeptical about Gerberry’s claim that some senators do not believe racino host communities should be paid, but recent developments have given us pause.

ReluctanceFor instance, Gerberry and Schiavoni have been trying to get leaders from the four communities the governor added to the list to publicly support Kasich’s payment proposal, but their unwillingness to take a stand does raise questions.

After all, it’s their constituents who stand to benefit.“I think there should be at least 10 to 15 state reps crying over here saying, ‘Why haven’t these communities gotten their money?’

I don’t know why there isn’t more of a push from every racino community ... Don’t you think you would have gotten involved? Actively involved?”

We certainly would think so.In the end, however, it’s up to Gov. Kasich to press the GOP leaders in the House and Senate to take up the issue.

After all, he said no to the original proposal that would have resulted in Austintown and Dayton being paid by now.

The two communities have already budgeted for the $500,000, which is not a handout.

While the seven racinos in Ohio — there also are four Vegas-style casinos in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Toledo — have spurred economic growth, they also forced governments to spend more on police and fire protection and road maintenance.


 - See more at: http://www.vindy.com/news/2015/feb/21/racino-communities-looking-to-governor-f/#sthash.ewD4jH8J.dpuf



Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Casino endorsements shouldn't be for sale



Editorial: Casino endorsements shouldn't be for sale



Wednesday, August 20, 2014


There's just so much fundamentally wrong with the city of Rensselaer's attempt to buy the city of Albany's support for a casino that it's difficult to know where to start criticizing.

Rensselaer Mayor Dan Dwyer has offered Albany Mayor Kathy Sheehan $10 million over 10 years out of his city's share of tax revenues from the proposed Hard Rock Hotel & Casino. In exchange, Albany would come out publicly in support of the Rensselaer project, an endorsement Dwyer hopes will help sway the state Gaming Commission to award Hard Rock the Capital Region’s gaming license.

What about this doesn't sound like a bribe? Is it fair? Is it even legal? In any case, what about this sounds remotely like a legitimate way to decide the location of a casino?

One of the casino application requirements was a demonstration of local support. How does voting to split the casino booty with surrounding communities in exchange for an endorsement demonstrate actual community support? For $10 million, most local towns would probably round up all their grandmothers and hand them over. For an endorsement, this is a great deal.

Would the Gaming Commission actually take this endorsement seriously, or would it see it for the fraud that it is? And if it did take the endorsement seriously, then what would that say to the other applicants who garnered actual local support from chambers of commerce, government bodies and citizens?

By allowing this to influence them, the Gaming Commission would be admitting to tilting the table in favor of one applicant over another. The whole thing is an invitation to lawsuits and criminal investigations.

If you're residents of the city of Rensselaer, you might be rather upset that your city government is willing to part with a substantial chunk of money that, by design of the application process, rightly belongs to you. The money is to offset the cost of dealing with the casino's effects on the local community, such as increased crime, traffic and loss in local business. By giving Albany $1 million, that's $1 million less that the city of Rensselaer has to combat the problems.

Rensselaer stands to collect about $5.7 million a year in gaming taxes, so the $1 million a year represents about 17.5 percent of the local share. For that, they’re assuming Albany’s endorsement will sway the Gaming Commission, a very risky assumption.

And what if you're a casino operator, who is being forced to pay a lot of taxes for all the problems your project is going to allegedly cause? If the host communities don't need all that money, as Rensselaer appears to be admitting, then you'd have to wonder why you're paying so much to them.
Albany officials justify accepting the money by saying their city will be affected by a casino, too. But the surrounding counties are already getting a share of casino taxes. Why does Albany deserve even more?

Schenectady's mayor says even if the city was approached, it isn't looking to share its casino revenues. He's right. The city should not have any part in this affair. In fact, no one should have any part in this affair.

The Gaming Commission should strongly declare that it will not consider endorsements that were garnered in exchange for money. And the other potential host communities should protest this practice for the unfair influence-buying that it is.

So to answer the question, where do you start criticizing this? Pretty much anywhere.



http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2014/aug/20/0820_editcasino/

Thursday, July 31, 2014

Lawsuits still pending after Argosy closure



Lawsuits still pending after Argosy closure

Posted: Jul 30, 2014 7:38 PM EDT

Friday, May 30, 2014

The Saddest Tourist Destination In America Just Got Even Worse


Atlantic City New Jersey Revel Casino Resort 1 25

The Saddest Tourist Destination In America Just Got Even Worse


I genuinely didn't think my opinion of Atlantic City could get worse. But they are apparently trying to take the home of an ill senior citizen, son of a murdered holocaust survivor, in order to help a failing casino.
Now, I grew up on Long Island but didn't spend summer weekends in the Hamptons. My family went to the Jersey Shore. We used to take the North Jersey Coast Line to Point Pleasant. I have wonderful memories growing up of the beach in New Jersey, although I don't remember the train as being especially reliable. I loved it when my train broke down on the way back to New York once, I think I was 7 and I was happy waiting for the next train to come by and pick us up since the cafe car on ours had run out of M&Ms.
Take the beach in New Jersey and add legal gambling and you should have an even better destination in Atlantic City.
On its face Atlantic City should have every conceivable destination. Not only is there beach and gambling, but proximity to Manhattan — as a population center and financial center. Who should need Vegas, when you have Vegas-on-the-Beach accessible by car?
There's this thing in travel, though. We're not supposed to say that destinations are awful, even when they are. We say things like we "didn't connect with" someplace we went, as though it was our fault or the destination wasn't for us even though we all presume that it was – of course – special. We just didn't get it. We failed.
Sometimes a place can be a cesspool, though. Sadly, that's Atlantic City, although it really shouldn't be. In Leaving Las Vegas, Nicolas Cage portrays a suicidal alcoholic and makes Vegas seem depressing. Vegas ain't got nothing on Atlantic City.
Unemployment in Atlantic City nears 14%. Most of the hoped-for casino projects over the past decade have failed to materialize.
Wikipedia gives us a list of cancelled casino projects, most of which currently sit as vacant lots.


Screen Shot 2014 05 21 at 1.36.56 PM
_


New Jersey has some of the worst crony capitalism in the United States, and yet (or because of?) Governor Christie sees Atlantic City as a standout for how poorly their regulatory regimes work. United offers new regional jet service to Chicago and Houston… not because there's value in the route, but because Chris Christie promised big taxpayer dollars to support public transportation to and from United's Newark hub if they'd do it, which would be a net transfer to the airline no matter how much they lose on the flights.
So it struck me when I saw Heels First write about the plight of a man she met while visiting the city.
It was at dinner I got the chance to chat with their clients — Charlie Birnbaum and his wife.
…Charlie was a brilliant concert pianist earlier in his career and now worked as a piano tuner using the house as his "studio." I was touched by the painstaking care with which he maintained the house over the years, enjoying it as a living memory of his parents and a respite from Atlantic City's hectic atmosphere.

And it was heartbreaking to know that it might all be taken away and torn down. The Casino Reinvestment Development Authority is attempting to use eminent domain to take his property for a yet-to-be-determined "better" use.
This has to be one of the saddest and most frustrating stories I've heard in recent times. Searching online for more details (it's relatively high profile, subject of aWall Street Journal op-ed last week), it just gets worse.
The property was purchased by the man's parents in 1969. They had met while hiding in a forest during the Holocaust. His mother continued to live in the home until she was murdered.
He works out of the home, its central location key to his ability to work at all because of his autoimmune condition.
Now the government has come for this home.
They're trying to take the property through eminent domain to support the Revel casino — which has been behind in property taxes by an 8 figure amount, filed for bankruptcy last year, and has seen its value drop by three-quarters — in unspecified ways. Seriously — they can't even articulate exactly what they're going to do with the property once they take it. (There's a "conceptual plan" to use the property for "restaurants, specialty stores, boutiques and residential housing for rent and purchase.")
There are some truly awful places in the world. You're not supposed to say that about tourist destinations; you're supposed to marvel in them or at least find what’s special about them. But Atlantic City's and New Jersey's political classes have done such terrible things to the place that I find it impossible to do that.

As they say, "if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got." And here, they seem to be repeating the same sort of cronyism that's just taken from local residents and given to big businesses without doing a thing to improve the community.


Read more: http://boardingarea.com/viewfromthewing/2014/05/21/saddest-tourist-destination-united-states-just-gotten-even-worse/#ixzz33FaZufMZ




Monday, May 26, 2014

Affleck all a SCAM?



Massachusetts ‘Gaming’ Future

Wow, how about that, Affleck getting busted in a casino that he has been gabbling in and has had a business relationship for over ten years.

Is it possible Affleck expertise card counting story was a publicity stunt to make him look more adept to playing the role of Batman.
 

Those of you who believe you can beat the casinos by card counting must also believe Batman is for real.

Oh, and one other thing, the card counting myth is one casinos love to publicize. It makes many go to casinos with their card counting system and by the time they realize it doesn’t work they’re hooked.

Pittsburg Tribune - May 25, 2014 -Casino may regret barring Affleck, consultant says
The Hard Rock banned Affleck from playing blackjack there for life after he was suspected of card-counting at a high-limit table, TMZ.com reported this month. The casino said he was free to play other games.

Affleck, now filming a Batman movie in Detroit, has not talked publicly about the incident, and his publicist did not respond to a request for comment.

Read more: http://triblive.com/aande/gambling/6148684-74/million-says-adams#ixzz32pgwXnqB



Massachusetts ‘Gaming’ Future

Wow, how about that, Affleck getting busted in a casino that he has been gabbling in and has had a business relationship for over ten years. 

Is it possible Affleck expertise card counting story was a publicity stunt to make him look more adapt to playing the role of Batman.   

Those of you who believe you can beat the casinos by card counting must also believe Batman is for real. 

Oh, and one other thing, the card counting myth is one casinos love to publicize. It makes many go to casinos with their card counting system and by the time they realize it doesn’t work they’re hooked.

Pittsburg Tribune - May 25, 2014 -Casino may regret barring Affleck, consultant says

The Hard Rock banned Affleck from playing blackjack there for life after he was suspected of card-counting at a high-limit table, TMZ.com reported this month. The casino said he was free to play other games. 
Affleck, now filming a Batman movie in Detroit, has not talked publicly about the incident, and his publicist did not respond to a request for comment. 

Read more: http://triblive.com/aande/gambling/6148684-74/million-says-adams#ixzz32pgwXnqB




Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Ben Affleck's Gambling Is Such A Bad Addiction .......



Ben Affleck's Gambling Is Such A Bad Addiction It’s Hurting His Marriage With Jennifer Garner?!



jennifer garner and ben affleck1 doodle



You’ve got to know when to hold ‘em and know when to fold ‘em, Ben Affleck!

But according to sources, the 41-year-old actor has been blowing through money at casinos like crazy!

And Jennifer Garner might be officially fed up!

As we reported earlier this month, Ben was even BANNED from the blackjack tables at the Hard Rock Casino in Las Vegas after he got caught counting cards!

Insiders say after security escorted Mr. Affleck out of the building, his wife was none too pleased that his gambling addiction was rearing its ugly head in their lives again!
Someone close to the couple explained:
"Jen demanded to go to Vegas with Ben because she doesn’t trust him and he felt like he had no choice but to take her. But after their dinners there each night, she would go back to their suite while Ben would stay out all night playing cards, betting thousands of dollars at a time. It makes Jen so mad, but once Ben starts gambling, he can’t stop.”
Woah…

If this is true, Ben REALLY needs to get himself some help!
We hope you listen to your wife, dude! It’s time to cash in your chips and find a new hobby!
[Image via WENN.]


Read more: http://perezhilton.com/2014-05-12-jennifer-garner-is-fed-up-with-ben-affleck-gambling-away-their-money#ixzz31awYfph0

Sunday, May 4, 2014

Ben Affleck: Just Another Celebrity Gambling Addict



Massachusetts 'GAMING' Future
If Affleck's lucky he will be banned from all casinos. He is a compulsive gambling degenerate who has lost millions, a marriage, and almost his acting career because of his gambling in and out of casinos.
The Huffington Post - 05/02/2014 6 - Ben Affleck Kicked Out Of Casino For Counting Cards

Ben Affleck was allegedly kicked out of the Hard Rock Casino in Las Vegas after security believed they caught him counting cards, TMZ reports.

Read more - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/02/ben-affleck-counting-cards-casino_n_5256376.html?view=print&comm_ref=false
 





Bill Kearney's photo.








Bill Kearney's photo.
















Sunday, March 16, 2014

Ho-Chunk seeks to enter lawsuit over Iowa casino



Ho-Chunk seeks to enter lawsuit over Iowa casino

Published 1:50 pm, Saturday, March 15, 2014

SIOUX CITY, Iowa (AP) — Ho-Chunk Inc., the economic development division of the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, is seeking to intervene in a high-stakes legal fight over casino gambling in Sioux City.
 
Ho-Chunk filed requests Friday to intervene in a lawsuit brought by owners of the Argosy riverboat casino in Sioux City, the Sioux City Journal reported (http://bit.ly/1fzg9AT ).
 
The lawsuit by Argosy parent company, Penn National Gaming Co., is challenging the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission's decision last year to award a casino license to the owners of the Hard Rock casino, which is being built in downtown Sioux City.
 
The Hard Rock proposal beat out bids from Penn National and Ho-Chunk for the license.
 
"We generally don't like lawsuits because they are expensive and messy," Ho-Chunk President and CEO Lance Morgan said. "However, we spent over $1 million on the (bid) process and, if it was flawed, then at the very least we need to have a seat at the table."
 
If the courts determine that neither the Hard Rock nor Penn National's bid should be awarded the license and that the application process was "inappropriate or flawed," the Ho-Chunk-led group would be the "logical recipient" of the license, attorneys for the group contend in their court filing.
 
In the petition, Ho-Chunk lodges complaints similar to Penn National's about the process and proceedings that led to the commission awarding the license to the Hard Rock group.
 
Among other complaints, it contends that the commission violated its own selection procedures by allowing Hard Rock developers to make "wholesale, and untimely, amendments" to its application, including its financing.
___
Information from: Sioux City Journal, http://www.siouxcityjournal.com

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Casino Bid Newcomers Weigh Site Closer to New York City



Casino Bid Newcomers Weigh Site Closer to New York City

Sunday, December 22, 2013

Supreme Court intervenes in Sioux City casino case


Supreme Court intervenes in Sioux City casino case

Updated 9:48 am, Friday, December 20, 2013
 
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — An Iowa Supreme Court justice has given hope to the builders of the Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Sioux City that they might not have to stop construction after spending $44 million on the half completed project.
 
Justice Brent Appel on Thursday granted an emergency stay of Polk County District Court Judge Robert Hanson's Dec. 10 ruling suspending the Hard Rock Hotel & Casino gambling license, the Sioux City Journal (http://bit.ly/1i7Du2E ) reported.
 
Hanson suspended the license as he ruled on a lawsuit challenging the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission's April decision, which gave Hard Rock casino owners a gambling license instead of Penn National Gaming, the owner of the Argosy riverboat casino in Sioux City.
 
The commission decided in June 2012 to take bids for a land casino after growing frustrated when Penn National couldn't reach a long-term contract with a local nonprofit sponsor. Penn National has operated the Argosy riverboat casino since 2005 when it bought Argosy Gaming.
 
Iowa gambling laws require casino operators to contract with nonprofit organizations and share profits with local community organizations.
 
Penn Nation eventually partnered with a nonprofit and submitted a bid for a new casino project.
The commission, however, voted in April to grant a new license to the Hard Rock project instead of Penn National's proposed project.
 
Penn National sued claiming the commission violated its own rules, Iowa law and Penn's constitutional rights during the bidding process for a new casino.
 
Hanson concluded that Penn National had the "substantial possibility" it would ultimately succeed in its lawsuit and issued a ruling that suspended the license issued to the Hard Rock casino.
 
That created huge issues for SCE Partners, the Hard Rock developers because they've already spent $44 million on the casino that is scheduled to open in January 2015. The city has already paid $5.5 million in promised tax financing for the project and has borrowed $22 million for parking and other infrastructure related to the casino project.
 
The commission and Hard Rock attorneys asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the case, saying Hanson's order jeopardizes financing for the $128.5 million project and millions of dollars in future casino revenues, as well as other economic benefits for the state and local community.
 
Penn National claimed its Argosy casino employs more than 300 people and generates $56 million in revenue a year and would incur "irreparable harm" unless the license for Hard Rock isn't suspended while its legal challenges are heard.
 
In its appeal, the commission counters that the Argosy faces no immediate injury because the commission has allowed the floating casino to continue to operate while construction continues on the Hard Rock casino.
 
Appel's order gave Penn National Gaming Co. until noon Tuesday to respond to the filings by the commission and SCE Partners.
 
One or more justices will then review the case and decide how to proceed.
___
Information from: Sioux City Journal, http://www.siouxcityjournal.com
 

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Gambling Debate Entangles Disney in Florida


Gambling Debate Entangles Disney in Florida


Edward Linsmier for The New York Times
Disney World in Florida. The Walt Disney Company has long argued that gambling tarnishes the state’s family-friendly brand.


 
But in the recently renewed battle over casino gambling in Florida this year, the popular Spider-Man slot machine delivers a different sort of jolt altogether. Spider-Man is one of a stable of Marvel superheroes that the Walt Disney Company acquired for $4 billion in 2009 and that continue to appear on slot machines, Internet slot machines and state lottery tickets. The lottery tickets have featured Iron Man and the Avengers.
      
Disney, a powerhouse in Florida because of its financial might and its sway over the tourism industry, has long led the fight against the expansion of casinos in the state, arguing successfully that gambling tarnishes Florida’s coveted family-friendly brand.
 
This year is no exception. For the second time in two years, state lawmakers are preparing to decide whether Las Vegas-style resort casinos should be allowed to open in Florida, a move that Disney hopes to thwart again. The company is so opposed to gambling that not even Disney cruise ships offer casinos, a mainstay of major cruise liners.
      
But in a nation increasingly awash in various forms of gambling, Disney is finding that keeping a constantly growing entertainment conglomerate completely removed from gambling is far more challenging than it used to be.
 
Asked whether Disney’s ties to the gambling industry, through Marvel, undercut its position on casino gambling, a Marvel spokeswoman said last week that the company planned to shed its connection to slot machines when the various licensing agreements expire. On Saturday, the spokeswoman added that Marvel had signed its last slot machine deal two years ago.
 
Spider-Man, Iron Man, the Incredible Hulk and others will begin to disappear from casinos and Internet gambling sites over the next “few years,” the spokeswoman said.
 
“Marvel discontinued plans to initiate or renew slot machine licensing arrangements as part of its integration with Disney,” the spokeswoman said. “The handful of remaining license agreements have expiration dates within the next few years.”
 
The spokeswoman also said late Saturday that Marvel currently has no active lottery deals and does not plan to sign any new one. Disney also faces a similar issue with its $4 billion acquisition of Lucasfilm last year. “Star Wars” characters, which have been featured in Disney parks for years, are also widely used in slot machines.
 
On Thursday, a Disney spokeswoman said the decision not to renew Lucasfilm and Marvel licensing agreements once they expired had been made recently. It had not previously been made public.
      
In the years since Disney’s acquisition of Marvel, gambling opponents and the company’s critics, including those seeking to open Vegas-style casinos in Florida, have accused Disney of being disingenuous in its campaign against casinos as new slot machines rolled out. Its competitors argue that Disney fears competition more than gambling.
 
“Disney’s internecine warfare against integrated resorts in Florida under this pretense demeans them significantly,” said Michael A. Leven, the president and chief operating officer of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation, which seeks to open a casino in South Florida.
      
A spokeswoman for Walt Disney World, Andrea M. Finger, said it could take several years for policies to align after two corporations merged, always a complex endeavor. But she said Disney’s commitment to keeping Vegas-style resorts out of the state was unwavering.
      
“We oppose the legalization of so-called destination resort casinos because this major expansion of gambling is inconsistent with Florida’s reputation as a family-friendly destination,” Ms. Finger said.
 
The decision that Disney, through Marvel and Lucasfilm, will phase out its slot machine licensing agreements comes at a pivotal time for Disney and its biggest allies, the influential Florida Chamber of Commerce and No Casinos, a nonprofit organization dedicated to keeping more casinos out of Florida. The groups are engaged in the latest chapter of a battle over the expansion of large casinos in Florida, an issue awash in lobbyists and money.
 
Gambling is already commonplace in Florida. The Seminole Tribe, which owns the Hard Rock brand, has seven large and small casinos in Florida with some table games but no roulette or craps.
 
Thoroughbred and greyhound racetracks, and jai alai frontons, all feature poker rooms, and in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties, the so-called racinos, like Mardi Gras, also offer slot machines.
The racinos also oppose Vegas-style casino gambling expansion.
      
Despite a decision last year to waylay a bill on expansion after fierce lobbying by Disney and others, the Legislature is now poised to take up the issue again. The decision stems in large part from the fact that the state’s five-year agreement with the Seminole Tribe expires in 2015. The agreement gives the tribe exclusive rights to table games like blackjack in their casinos. (Slot machines are covered under a separate agreement.) In exchange, the tribe pays the state $1 billion over five years.
 
The state and the tribe will soon have to negotiate a new agreement. Competition from full-scale private casinos in the state could scramble the deal and drain the state of $233 million a year, from the tribe, with no guarantee that tax money from expanded private casinos would offset the loss.
 
For Disney, the debate over casinos has grown more difficult in the past year as its relationship with Marvel becomes more obvious to theme park visitors and other Disney customers.
      
“Hypocrisy is in the eye of the beholder,” said Robert Jarvis, a law professor at Nova Southeastern University’s Law Center and an expert on gambling law. “If they were honest, they would just come out and say, it’s Business 101. We’re trying to protect our turf, and we’ve always attempted to do that.”
 
Marvel merchandise has been sold in Disney stores and gift shops since shortly after the Marvel acquisition. Now Marvel’s superheroes, including Iron Man and Thor, will soon be featured alongside Disney princesses and Mickey Mouse in some Disney parks. In November, Thor will become the first Marvel character to greet visitors at Disneyland in California. Captain America is expected on cruise ships soon.
 
Because of an existing agreement with Universal Studios, Disney World in Orlando cannot feature live Marvel characters or create Marvel rides. But merchandise is available.
 
The fact that Marvel characters crop up around the country in lottery tickets further complicates the issue for Disney. In Colorado this spring, shoppers could buy scratch-off lottery tickets featuring Iron Man. And in Idaho and Texas, the Avengers were featured on scratch-off tickets.
 
While some consider lottery tickets a benign form of gambling, Keith Whyte, the executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling, said scratch-off tickets are a “gateway” to more serious gambling. Some tickets are even sold in vending machines, making them easily accessible to children, Mr. Whyte said.
 
For John Sowinski, the president of No Casinos, Disney critics are using the slot machine issue simply to distract.
      
“They want to change the subject,” he said of the large-casino interests. “They don’t want to have a discussion about the merits of the issue. If Disney wanted to be in the gambling business, they would be, on their cruise ships and elsewhere.”
 
 
 
 

Friday, October 25, 2013

Why Holyoke isn't safe

NO COMMUNITY IN THE COMMONWEALTH WILL EVER BE SAFE
FROM PREDATORY GAMBLING UNTIL WE REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL!

FROM: Lyn Horan
We Are NOT Safe
From The Threat of a
HOLYOKE CASINO
Here's Why:
...

1. The Holyoke City Council has placed a
referendum question on the November
ballot asking if voters approve of placing a
casino in Holyoke.

2. Eric Suher, owner of Mountain Park, was
recently spotted meeting with a casino
executive.

3. Hard Rock Casino, who recently lost their
bid in West Springfield, is searching for
another location and already has a fully
developed plan to build a Holyoke casino at
Wyckoff Country Club on Easthampton
Road. Their plan is ready to go. All they
need is a receptive mayor.

4.Jeff Stanek has said that pursuing a casino
for Holyoke is a good idea. (Alex Morse
previously turned down Hard Rock and is
firmly opposed to bringing a casino to
Holyoke).

5. The Massachusetts gaming law gives the
Mayor sole power to negotiate a deal with
casino developers. They do not need
additional authority from other city entities.

6. There is over a billion dollars
($1,000,000,000) at stake. It would be
foolish to believe that developers, operators
and property owners would simply walk
away from the temptation of this kind of
money without putting up a fight.

7. With the junctions of I-91 and The Mass
Pike on our doorstep, many informed

people believe that Holyoke would be at
the very top of the Gaming Commission's
list – if it is back in play.
8. Any casino developer who has already paid
the $400,000 Phase I application fee to the
state, can pursue a casino in any
community which approves it, including
Holyoke. The Phase I application is NOT
location-specific.

9. Contrary to common misconception,
Springfield does NOT have a lock on the
casino. Just over a year ago everyone was
saying that Palmer had it sewn up and that
Springfield didn't stand a chance. NO ONE
has it locked in, because the final decision
rests entirely with the Gaming Commission
and no one knows which site they will pick.

10. The deadlines posted by the Mass. Gaming
Commission (MGC) are not absolute.
They are described as "likely" target dates.
If the MGC decides to shift the deadline by
just 90 days, Holyoke will be back in play
after this election. That shift is at the sole
discretion of the Gaming Commission.

11. If Palmer voters defeat Mohegan Sun on
November 5th; and if the MGC denies
MGM because of their Macau partnership
with daughter of organized crime leader
Stanley Ho (as happened in New Jersey); or
if the MGC recognizes that traffic on I-91
and the 3 bridges will be unmanageable –
Holyoke will be back in the running.

12. The threat to Holyoke will exist until the
day that the Mass. Gaming Commission
gives final approval to a developer to build
the casino elsewhere. Until that day comes,
we are not safe from the threat of a
Holyoke casino.

Presented by:
Citizens for a Better Holyoke
P.O. Box 6543
Holyoke, MA 01041
CitizensForABetterHolyoke@gmail.com

COMING SOON:
A VOTER’S GUIDE TO THE
CANDIDATES WHO OPPOSE
A HOLYOKE CASINO
See More

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

Desperate Suffolk Downs Races For New Partner Among the Leftovers



Suffolk Downs races to rein in new partner




LOTS OF UPS AND DOWNS: Signs for and against the proposed Suffolk Downs casino abound in East Boston neighborhoods. Suffolk Downs officials are racing to secure a new casino company partner before the Nov. 5 referendum on the proposal.

Tuesday, October 22, 2013



Suffolk Downs, under pressure to lock down a new gaming partner before a do-or-die Nov. 5 vote on the
$1 billion project, is in talks with at least four casino companies potentially interested in joining forces as shockwaves from last week’s bombshell Caesars disqualification continue to reverberate throughout the industry.

“We are in active conversations and encouraged by the high level of interest from top-class gaming operators,” Suffolk Downs Chief Operating Officer Chip Tuttle told the Herald last night.

“The most important thing is that we find someone that is suitable for the gaming commission and is accepted by Boston and Revere.”

Sources close to the situation said four companies are at the top of Suffolk Downs’ wish list, including three that have already been deemed suitable by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission: Penn National Gaming, which is seeking a slots license for Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville; Rush Street Gaming, a Chicago-based company that had been pursuing a slots parlor in the Worcester area; and Cordish, a Baltimore firm that wants to build a slots palace in Leominster.



[What a card! A SLOT BARN is ow a SLOTS PALACE! He's not biased...No!]


The fourth, Hard Rock, had been pursuing a casino in West Springfield, but the project was rejected by voters.

The company, which runs the Seminole Hard Rock Casinos in Tampa and Hollywood, Fla., has not been vetted by the state gaming panel.

Hard Rock and Cordish already have strong ties to Suffolk Downs owner Richard Fields, who worked with Cordish to co-develop the Florida Hard Rock casinos.

Rush Street Gaming honcho Neil Bluhm, meanwhile, has strong Boston ties as one of the developers of Copley Place and Faneuil Hall. He also runs successful urban casinos in Chicago, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

A Penn National spokesman said he would not comment on “rumor,” while a Rush Street spokeswoman declined to comment. Officials from Hard Rock and Cordish did not respond to requests for comment.

“Suffolk Downs has to get a partner to put this behind them,” said City Council President Stephen J. Murphy. “That’s going to be the most important thing. I think they’ll have one by the end of the week.”

“I’d like to see the casino part decided by the vote. I would say as quickly as possible,” said Mayor Thomas M. Menino.

Suffolk Downs launched a new TV ad today touting the project and assuring supporters that the Caesars split is not a deal killer.

“There are thousands of elements to this proposal and the gaming operator was only one,” Tuttle said.Suffolk Downs abruptly parted ways Friday with Las Vegas gaming giant Caesars over issues raised in a 900-page gaming commission background report, including reputed Russian mob ties to a Caesars business partner. Officials at Caesars — the largest casino company in the world — have blasted the findings and say it sets an impossible standard for international companies.

- See more at: http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/10/suffolk_downs_races_to_rein_in_new_partner#sthash.9KGiBF1Y.dpuf

Saturday, October 12, 2013

The Casino Vultures NEVER Accept NO!



CASINO ALERT AND UPDATE:
Casino development is still a threat to Holyoke:
1. Casino Referendum – Holyoke residents will be tasked with voting concerning development of a casino on Nov. 5th. Though this is a non-binding referendum it will not only be considered by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission in making their decision for placing a Western Massachusetts casino, every public official or potential public official, and every Holyoke resident who votes will use its outcome in decisions made concerning Holyoke’s future.  

 2. Who gets it has not been decided and a specific geographical location did not have to be designated by individual developers when applications were accepted in the Gaming Commission’s Phase 1.
3. Hard Rock Casino is not likely to just give up after losing the West 
Springfield casino referendum for the above stated reason. They already have a fully developed plan (Wyckoff Country Club/Mountain Park) ready to go, and lots of money invested including a non-refundable $400,000 application fee, lawyers’ fees, marketing, etc. And for the developers…they see billions of dollars to be made for themselves that they are not likely to give up on just yet.
4. Prevention and watchfulness is the best strategy for us. A year ago, everyone thought Palmer had it locked up, over Springfield… now look at it.
Most of us were pretty sure in Holyoke that we could avoid a time-consuming and costly casino referendum back in the early spring. But our City Council slipped in a last minute vote on it when 3 City Council members who were likely to vote against it were known to be absent from that meeting.
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has the final decision in their hands. Who knows what politics or other variables may come to play in that decision.
Would you rather be vigilant in protecting our city from this kind of devastating development, and the casino goes to somewhere besides Holyoke (along with all its problems), or stay asleep and wake up one day to find a casino with all its destructive outcomes is being built in your city?