Meetings & Information




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






Showing posts with label Rep. Joseph Wagner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rep. Joseph Wagner. Show all posts

Monday, June 2, 2014

Genuflecting to the Casino Vultures!




Gambling regulator urges Massachusetts lawmakers to revise some provisions in casino law




BOSTON — Before the legislature breaks for summer, Massachusetts' top gambling regulator wants lawmakers to address parts of the 2011 casino law dealing with hiring and income tax collection.

But a leading lawmaker says the Democratic majority is not yet committed to approving the recommended changes in time for July's expected end of the legislative session.

Massachusetts Gaming Commission Chairman Stephen Crosby says the casino law's hiring provision should be amended before January, when Penn National Gaming is set to begin hiring new workers for its slot parlor at the Plainridge harness racing track in Plainville.

Crosby said the law's income tax requirements for gamblers could discourage prospective developers and make Massachusetts less competitive to its neighbors.

He pointed to concerns voiced by Wynn Resorts, which proposes a nearly $1.6 billion casino in Everett, and others.

"Some of the operators have said they would not go forward if that does not change," Crosby said. "If the legislature chooses to address it, it would be better to do it soon."

State Rep. Joseph Wagner, a Chicopee Democrat that co-chairs the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies, which handles casino-related proposals, said Democratic leaders received the gaming commission's concerns last week and are weighing their next move.

"We'll see, given the short time frame, whether it materializes this year," he said. "But the reality that a license has already been awarded is cause for us to look at the issue sooner rather than later."

Wagner added that he supports addressing the income tax issue and remains "open to discussions" about amending the law's hiring provision.

In a May 20 memorandum to Gov. Deval Patrick and leading lawmakers, the gaming commission recommended raising the threshold for collecting state income tax withholding from the current $600 or more in gambling winnings to $1,200.

That would bring Massachusetts in line with the federal income tax withholding threshold and match a standard used in neighboring states.

The commission also called for lawmakers to allow discretion in the hiring of casino employees with criminal records.

Specifically, it is concerned about a provision that automatically disqualifies those convicted of "a felony or other crime involving embezzlement, theft, fraud or perjury" from being employed at gambling establishments, no matter how old the crime.

The commission says the provision could be a barrier to providing jobs to chronically underemployed people, which is a priority of the casino law.

"Obviously, you're going to have automatic disqualifications for people that work in the (casino) pit — the dealers and the other people that will be handling money," Crosby, the commission chairman, said this week. "But if you're working in a hotel or a restaurant, we feel that an automatic disqualification is too rigorous."

The two recommendations come after gambling operators requested a wide range of changes to the casino law.

The commission ultimately declined to recommend many of those suggestions; some they said could be addressed through administrative-level regulations and rules.

Both Wynn and MGM Resorts, for example, wanted guarantees that the state's 25 percent tax on gross gambling revenues would not change during the 15-year licensing period.

They also sought financial protections in case an Indian tribe-owned casino opens in Massachusetts, as well as relief from fees and other upfront costs if the casino law is repealed.

The state's highest court is expected to rule by July on whether a referendum to repeal the law should be allowed on the November ballot.

MGM, which proposes an $800 million casino in Springfield, has stressed that the suggested changes are not critical to their bid for a casino license.

And Mohegan Sun, which proposes a more than $1 billion casino on the Revere side of the Suffolk Downs horse-racing track, has said it will abide by the casino law as written.


http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/c1aafc8b98054981b7354bc15a13ecb5/MA--Massachusetts-Casino-Legislation

Saturday, November 9, 2013

Maybe we have some lawmakers who should go elsewhere


Lawmakers: Mohegan Sun could go elsewhere

WMass goes from 3 possible casino host towns to 1
By Christine Lee Friday, November 8, 2013




Boston (WWLP) - Western Massachusetts has gone from a possible three casino host communities, down to one, with both Palmer and West Springfield voting against hosting a casino.

“The system is working, [the state Legislature] wanted communities to make the decision if they wanted to host a facility,” said Sen. Stanley Rosenberg (D-Amherst). “Four communities [in Massachusetts] have said yes and four have said no, it’s local decision-making.”

Springfield has voted yes, but their casino operator, MGM, has a partner in China that has been linked to Chinese organized crime by the New Jersey attorney general. The state Gaming Commission has rejected Caesar’s as a casino operator in East Boston because of their link to Russian organized crime. Wilbraham state Senator Gales Candaras hopes the outcome will be different for MGM.

“I don’t think you can compare the problem that Caesar’s,” said Candaras. “They were involved literally, the financing was coming from organized crime, ostensibly the Russian mob. You can’t compare that with what has happened with MGM.”


Senator Gale Candaras needs to do her homework!


 


Chicopee state Representative Joseph Wagner points out that Mohegan Sun has passed a background check by the Gaming Commission and could look for another city or town to host them.

“There are other locations potentially where they might look to cite a casino given that they would be qualified like Springfield, like West Springfield, like any community that might have an interest,” said Wagner.

The Chicopee Democrat added that the law allows Palmer to revisit the issue of hosting a casino six months after the casino referendum vote.


http://www.wwlp.com/news/politics/state-politics/wwlp-lawmakers-mohegan-sun-could-go-elsewhere-cl

Monday, September 9, 2013

Committee to vote on Wampanoag pact Tuesday

It's easy to forget memorable moments in the rush to prey on Massachusetts residents....alas!

A quick search reminds one of the brilliance of Rep. Joseph Wagner [D-Chicopee]
who seems to believe the 'best and brightest' are in government. With few exceptions, informed Massachusetts residents would heartily disagree. One could make a successful argument that the 'best and the brightest' were those who had the sense to oppose Gambling legislation.

As a six-member legislative panel finalizes details of the Bay State’s high-stakes casino bill, the House member leading negotiations declared that he’s inclined to oppose any efforts to block lawmakers from working in the casino industry for a year after they leave office.

“It’s my sense that this matter is so important that we should not preclude the best and the brightest from being eligible even if those people would be in government presently,’’ said Democratic Representative Joseph Wagner of Chicopee, according to the State House News Service.


Committee to vote on Wampanoag pact Tuesday

The Casino Compact has been languishing on Beacon Hill since April

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Genting/Wampanoag Compact: A Dazzling Display of Propaganda and Misinformation

 
 


Let's not forget that this location bears the greatest infrastructure costs.
 
 
Legislators wary of new compact with Mashpee tribe
 
BOSTON — Legislators deciding whether a gaming compact goes before the full House and Senate were worried Wednesday about how much it cost when the first agreement between the Mashpee Wampanoag and the governor was rejected by the federal government.
 
"We swung and missed in a pretty big way the last time around," state Rep. Joseph Wagner, D-Chicopee, co-chairman of the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies, said about the first compact being rejected by the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs.

During a hearing that spanned more than five hours before a packed room at the Statehouse, the committee heard from Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe leaders, a handful of representatives and senators, a company that hopes to compete for the region's gambling dollars, and representatives of Gov. Deval Patrick.
 
The committee took no action on the new compact, but Wagner indicated that members will move it forward for consideration by the Legislature. The committee will take it up during an as-yet-unscheduled executive session.
 
The federal bureau determined that the first compact was unfair because the tribe would have paid the state 21.5 percent of gross gambling revenue without enough concessions. It also found that the state and tribe overreached in attempting to settle items not related to Indian gaming, including hunting and fishing rights and land issues.
 
Under the new compact, the state would receive anywhere from zero to 21 percent in gross gambling revenue depending on the extent of competition.
 
During testimony, Wagner asked for a full accounting of how much the two compacts cost the state to negotiate and even urged Patrick's office to seek a refund from the state's legal advisers.
 
He pointed out that the federal rejection included 18 pages of detailed problems with the first agreement.
 
"It was pretty strong in terms of the number of ways we didn't hit the nail on the head," he said.
The Expanded Gaming Act authorized $5 million to be spent in hiring legal consultants for the governor's office.
 
Brendan Ryan, Patrick's chief of staff, said not all of that money has been spent, though he added that a significant portion was used to negotiate the two compacts.
 
If the compact is approved by the Legislature, the bureau has 45 days to approve or reject it.
 
Tribal council Chairman Cedric Cromwell said after testifying that he's optimistic the committee, and ultimately the Legislature, will approve it.
 
"There are $2.5 billion in reasons why the compact should be taken up and approved," he said, referring to the estimated revenue the state will get during the 20 years of the compact.
 
Both Ryan and Cromwell testified that the bureau provided technical assistance in answering concerns raised with the first compact and tried to ease fears that the second agreement wouldn't hold.
 
The assistance included a meeting with Kevin Washburn, assistant secretary of the bureau, and his staff in Washington, D.C.
 
A steady stream of legislators, including two from the Cape, testified Wednesday, most of them supportive of the compact and the tribe's efforts to build a $500 million casino in Taunton.
 
Sen. Daniel Wolf, D-Harwich, steered clear of the particulars of the compact and said this was an opportunity for the Legislature to right a historic wrong in how Indian tribes were treated.
 
"Many people think history started when the Mayflower landed in Provincetown," Wolf said. "This is an opportunity to revisit that history, to correct that history, to rewrite that history in a way I think we can all be proud of."
 
Rep. Sarah Peake, D-Provincetown, who, like Wolf, voted against legalizing casinos, said she supports the tribe's proposal for Southeastern Massachusetts and the "multiplier effect" it could have on tourism in the region.
 
Rep. Robert Koczera, D-New Bedford, a member of the joint committee, made the case that there is no urgency to approve a compact with the tribe, but Nick Martinelli, the governor's deputy general counsel, said it's important to act on the compact while the state and tribe's interests are aligned.
 
Other representatives from the southeast area of the state, as well as Marsha Sajer, an attorney for KG Urban Enterprises, a company that is competing with the tribe with a New Bedford casino, also cautioned against rushing.
 
"There is no obligation on the part of the commonwealth or any state to negotiate a compact absent land in trust," Sajer said.
 
Sajer and Andrew Stern, a principal for KG Urban, doubted the tribe would either get its land or a compact approved.
 
"Why would you care if we approve the compact or don't approve the compact?" state Sen. Gale Candaras, D-Wilbraham, the committee's co-chairman, said in response. "It's almost a nullity. Based on what you're saying, the vote of this committee and the vote of the Legislature is irrelevant."
 
Under the gaming law, commercial casinos would have to pay 25 percent of revenue to the state; meanwhile, under the compact, a tribal casino in the same region as a commercial casino would pay nothing.
 
"Having this compact approved with its zero revenue is going to have a chilling effect on my client to get financial backers," Sajer said.
 
Wagner attempted to keep the discussion on the compact and away from other federal hurdles faced by the tribe, including its application to have land in Taunton and Mashpee taken into federal trust as an initial reservation.
 
That proved fruitless as speakers repeatedly brought up a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, known as the Carcieri decision, that calls into question the ability of the Department of the Interior to take land in trust for tribes recognized after 1934.
 
The tribe has made the case that it was under federal jurisdiction in 1934, a distinction one of its Indian gaming lawyers, Arlinda Locklear, said would allow the bureau to take the land into trust and for a casino to be built. The tribe expects a decision soon.
 
"The final decision on a Carcieri analysis is measured in weeks, not years," Locklear said.
 
State Sen. Marc Pacheco, D-Taunton, urged the committee to move the renegotiated deal forward expeditiously. "I understand ... your concerns of making sure we don't get up again and swing again, but we can also hit a home run here," he said. "We can also get this done."

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130516/NEWS/305160329/-1/NEWSLETTER100


Massachusetts lawmakers consider new Mashpee Wampanoag casino compact
By State House News Service
on May 15, 2013

By ANDY METZGER

BOSTON — A push for legislative approval of a gaming compact between the state and the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe ran into some wary lawmakers who questioned a previous compact’s rejection by the federal government and whether the current compact should be shelved until the casino approval process is further along.

The Mashpee face a few hurdles in their bid to build a 150,000 square-foot resort casino with 150 table games, 40 poker tables and 3,000 slots on an industrial park in Taunton. The first compact with the state was rejected by the Department of the Interior, and the federal government is still reviewing the necessary step of taking the Mashpee’s land into federal trust. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has decided to open up the licensing process in southeastern Massachusetts to commercial casino developers along with the tribe, while the commission waits to see how the land-in-trust and gaming compact are resolved.

According to the tribe and its attorneys, the land-in-trust application is on its way towards clearing another stage in the approval process, and the new compact will likely receive approval as federal regulators have been apprised of the negotiations.

The second iteration of the gaming compact was met with some skepticism, however, as questions remain over whether the tribe will be able to receive all the necessary approvals.

“I think we can put it on a shelf,” said Rep. Robert Koczera (D-New Bedford) as the compact was up for a hearing before the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. He said, “We can take it up if the time comes when the land is taken into trust.”

“We swung and missed in a pretty big way the last time around,” House Chairman Joe Wagner (D-Chicopee) said, referring to the rejection of the last compact. He said it was his intention to “at some point sooner rather than later move forward this compact to a vote.” Wagner later said, “This committee is likely at a point going to move this compact forward.”

The last compact between the state and the tribe was the first of its kind that federal regulators had seen, said Brendan Ryan, chief of staff to Gov. Deval Patrick. Massachusetts is the first state to move ahead on tribal casinos and commercial casinos at the same time, Ryan told the committee, attempting to assuage concerns that the second compact would be rejected again.

“We’re as confident as can be that we addressed every concern,” said Ryan, who said the Bureau of Indian Affairs worked much more closely with the tribe and the state in the second go-around. He said, “I think it’s more likely to succeed because we got constructive feedback and addressed it.”

The November 2011 gaming law allowed for three casinos in three regions of the state and created a special process for an Indian tribe that was able to line up a vote in the host community and receive a legislatively approved gaming compact with the state by July 31, 2012, which the Mashpee accomplished.

Mashpee Chairman Cedric Cromwell told reporters the compact gives “a meaningful concession to our tribe – exclusivity” and said it is “so important to build a relationship.” The new compact creates a sliding scale for what the tribe would owe the state, ranging from 21 percent as long as it’s the only casino in the state to zero if another casino opens in the southeastern region.

If the federal government grants the tribe land in trust, the tribe will be able to put “a shovel in the ground,” regardless of any revenue-sharing agreement with the state, Cromwell said. He told the committee, “If our compact is not approved, the tribe’s going to move forward anyway.”

A tribal casino without revenue-sharing would provide fierce competition to any nearby commercial casino that would have to hand over a portion of profits to the state.

“You can’t compete with us,” Cromwell said.

KG Urban Enterprises, which wants to build a casino in the southeastern region, rehabbing a polluted former power plant along the New Bedford waterfront, has already spent $7 million on its potential venture, according to KG Managing Director Andrew Stern.

“All we’ve ever asked for is a level playing field,” Stern said. He said it was a “worthy endeavor” to attempt to clean up a “filthy” brownfield along the harbor.

KG Urban Enterprise’s gaming expert Marsha Sajer said if its reservation is approved, the Mashpee would need a compact to build a full-fledged casino, and could only go forward with a much smaller operation absent a compact.

“It simply is going to be a bingo hall or nothing more than a card room,” Sajer said. She also said that the Bureau of Indian Affairs closely reviews the environmental impacts of taking land into trust for gaming, and said it can be a six-year process.

“These are indigenous people to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,” said Senate Chairwoman Gale Candaras, who said the state would have to negotiate a compact with the tribe if it obtained land in trust. She said, “All they ever got from us was smallpox, and we treated them very poorly.”

The land-in-trust application is currently under a review to determine whether the Mashpee were federally recognized before 1934, according to the tribe’s attorney, Arlinda Locklear, who said the federal government had dealt with the tribe on multiple occasions over the years.

Locklear said that in the 1820s, as the U.S. secretary of war was removing tribes along the eastern seaboard, the federal government elected to allow the Mashpee to stay, and in the early 20th century about a dozen Mashpee students were sent off to an Indian school in Pennsylvania.

Locklear told the News Service that the land-in-trust will give the Mashpee a tribal reservation, and said final approval is “months, less than years” away from final approval. It is “weeks” from clearing the historic test, Locklear told the committee.

Mashpee Vice Chairwoman Jessie Baird said Taunton was an important place in the tribe’s history, as a tribal chief during King Philip’s War was captured by the English while crossing the Taunton River and her head was put on a pike in Taunton where it stayed for years.

“We have not forgotten our territory or who we are. And I will submit to you that water always seeks its source,” Baird told the committee in the middle of a roughly five-hour hearing.

Both Ryan and Mashpee attorney Howard Cooper said Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Kevin Washburn, who rejected the last compact, seemed likely to approve the new compact if it reaches his desk.

“They could not give us pre-approval because no such thing exists,” Cooper said.

Rep. Keiko Orrall (R-Lakeville), who now represents the area of Taunton that includes the proposed site, said she thought the federal government would not approve the compact, because the Gaming Commission’s decision to open up the licensing process to commercial bidders removes the tribe’s exclusivity.

Rep. Antonio Cabral (D-New Bedford) said that the compact would allow the tribe to decide on a completely different site for a range of reasons, allowing it to build a casino as far away as Chatham.

Rep. Kevin Kuros (R-Uxbridge) said a potential compact would still be valuable to the tribe even if it received land in trust before a compact was approved.

“There’s value in exclusivity, and that value doesn’t go away the day that land gets taken into trust,” said Kuros.

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/05/massachusetts_lawmakers_consid.html


Lawmakers hesitate on new Wampanoag compact

A tribal casino without revenue-sharing would provide fierce competition to any nearby commercial casino that would have to hand over a portion of profits to the state

Saturday, May 11, 2013

Blinded by Greed



Ya gotta feel sorry for a Tribe so blinded by GREED, they sold their souls to Genting that received a Free Pass from scrutiny by the Gambling Commission or others.  Mired in debt at usury rates, even were a casino constructed, decades would elapse before emancipation from the parasitic investor.

For more information:
Reel Wamps
WampaLeaks
Wampanoag financial backers a terror funding source?
Genting Connected to Islamic Extremists?

Genting was the financier of the Seneca Niagara Casino Hotel in Niagara Falls, New York. Genting charged the tribe an exorbitant 28 percent interest rate, potentially in violation of the Indian Gaming Regulations under the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Genting also stayed in the deal for almost 15 years when they were legally limited to five. Seneca Tribal Council members have testified that armed Chinese thugs showed up to collect Genting’s money when tribal lawyers pointed out that Genting was violating the law.

The Tribe even ignored that Governor Slot Barns promised the Pokassets a casino of their own. Well.....that was before an election, after which amnesia set in. 

The sudden awakening by Casino KoolAid Consuming Rep. Joseph Wagner is revelatory. [See previous mention HERE.] Have any of the Beacon Hill Clowns requested, reviewed, scrutinized the woefully deficient Genting/Wampanoag federal application?


Rep. Wagner was among those little men, enjoying the ego-stroking by Gambling Lobbyists who failed to conduct his due diligence about the catastrophic consequences of Predatory Gambling, ignored the warnings and current reality.



Desperate States are goose-stepping their way to Government Sponsored Bankruptcy by computer and cell phone. Revenues are declining. Gambling Market Saturation defined around the nation, around the globe, as the supply of new Gambling Addicts is exhausted. Lack of Tourism and Lack of Economic Development defined repeatedly. Overstated and irrational projections disproved. Irrational Projections that defy logic repeated by the Gambling Commission.

Not content to merely peer down Alice's Rabbit Hole, these guys joined the Mad Hatter's Tea Party!



Wampanoag's new compact to be debated in House May 15, approval is unclear

It won't get a “rubber stamp” in the Legislature this time - Patrick sure the BIA will approve this new compact
 

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Academic offers grim outlook for gaming in Massachusetts

Experts have informed the Gamb[l]ing Commission about MARKET SATURATION.

They don't want to hear!








Academic offers grim outlook for gaming in Massachusetts

By Andy Metzger / State House News Service
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
 
The most enticing casino games might involve cards, dice and flashing lights, but in academic Robert Goodman’s telling, the spread of gaming across the country has been more like a collapsing string of dominoes.

“The more that this happens in Massachusetts, the more it’s going to happen in Rhode Island and Maine and all the surrounding states,” Goodman told reporters outside the Massachusetts Gaming Commission meeting on Tuesday, saying “New Hampshire is very likely to argue for several casinos.”

Testifying before the commission, Goodman laid out a grim picture of casinos’ impact and suggested that the commission put a halt to casinos licenses until an economic study is complete.

“I think a lot of comments that he poses maybe have been better suited for when we were having the debate about bringing casinos or not. I think that debate is already over,” commissioner Enrique Zuniga told the News Service after the meeting.

[Commissioner Zuniga, Maybe you weren't paying attention, but Professor Goodman has offered those comments repeatedly, as have others.]


In late spring, Rep. Joseph Wagner (D-Chicopee) publicly admonished commission chairman Stephen Crosby for suggesting that the commission might issue less than the maximum three casinos permitted by law, depending on the results of an economic analysis.

"The clear legislative intent was for the Gaming Commission to license three resort casinos if private sector market conditions supported that capacity," Wagner’s press release said. He went on to say,

"The private sector will determine market capacity. Therefore, the job of the Gaming Commission is to secure the best agreement for the citizens and taxpayers for each region." 

[Braniac Rep. Wagner hasn't noticed that Foxwoods and Moehgan Sun have declining revenues and are mired in debt or that other states have been forced to bailout the Gambling Industry. One can only speculate that Rep Wagner may have an employment promise since he was so convinced of his brilliance.]


Zuniga was more amenable toward Goodman’s ideas for a study, though Goodman himself was incredulous that the state passed the gaming law last November without a thorough academic study.

[It took Governor Slot Barns Patrick more than two years to meet with casino opponents. The Governor agreed to support an INDEPENDENT COST ANALYSIS and developed amnesia after his re-election.]


“In terms of looking at the actual economic impacts of problem gamblers, there was very little. In most cases nothing,” said Goodman, an emeritus professor at Hampshire College who said studies that preceded passage of the law were funded by the gaming industry and did not delve deeper than forecasts on the number of jobs created. 

Even those jobs created by casinos could become a liability, leaving lawmakers open to pressure if the casinos hit rough financial times and need a bailout.

“You’ll have thousands of people working at the casinos and should they run into trouble you’ll have people at the State House saying, ‘Keep our jobs,’ ” said Goodman, who claimed Indiana has been paying $60 million per year to subsidize the racing industry and New Jersey gave $261 million in tax breaks to an Atlantic City casino developer after Morgan Stanley walked away from a $1.2 billion investment.

An unabashed critic of the gaming industry, Goodman wrote “The Luck Business” and has debated gaming with casino proponent Congressman Barney Frank in the pages of Commonwealth Magazine.



The Luck Business: The Devastating Consequences and Broken Promises of America's Gambling Explosion
by




He said “any” casino would be “too much” in what he describes as an already saturated market for gambling.

“You’re the commission. You’re the gambling or Gaming Commission, I’d call a halt of this whole thing until you had a serious economic impact analysis,” Goodman said.

Goodman said an economic study into a casino’s impact should look at the effect on nearby businesses and the potential secondary effects of problem gambling, including debts, bankruptcies, fraud and other crime.

In its proposed budget the Gaming Commission is planning for nearly $1.2 million to be spent on research projects, including $100,000 on economic impact and $937,000 for a baseline study of compulsive gambling.

Other effects of gaming in Massachusetts could include a shift in the political culture, as the gaming lobby maintains power and state officials begin to rely on gaming revenues.

“The state will shift from being a regulator of gambling. But they will primarily become a promoter of gambling,” Goodman said.

http://bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1061146687

Sunday, June 3, 2012

We will REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL!





Rocky rollout to era of Mass. casino gambling

More problems than progress in first 6 months

Steve Wynn, the Las Vegas casino mogul, hoped to build a resort casino in Foxborough but dropped his plans after residents elected gambling opponents to the town board of selectmen.
(Wynn Resorts via AP)Steve Wynn, the Las Vegas casino mogul, hoped to build a resort casino in Foxborough but dropped his plans after residents elected gambling opponents to the town board of selectmen.
Globe Staff / June 3, 2012
 
Once the Legislature finally approved Las Vegas-style gambling last November, after years of debate and near misses, many believed the hard part was over - and that the promise of thousands of jobs and millions in new state revenue would soon be realized.
 
And when REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL passes, it will get even more stressful!
 
But the first six months of the casino era in Massachusetts have been hampered by controversies and false starts, proving that little is easy when it comes to launching a new industry with billions of dollars at stake.

The casino law is under assault in federal court. The thorny issue of tribal gambling is expected to produce more litigation before it ever produces a casino. The state gambling commission had a public relations disaster over its first high-profile hire.

And although the gambling law was written to create competition among wealthy developers seeking to outdo each other in pursuit of coveted licenses, that bidding war has yet to fully develop, in part because of local opposition and also to a measure of apathy toward Massachusetts from some casino companies. 

Middleboro, Fall River, Foxboro, Brimfield, Freetown and Lakeville have said NO! There is growing opposition as people inform themselves.

“It’s been a pretty rocky start,’’ said Roger Gros, publisher of Global Gaming Business magazine, which covers the industry.

The leader of the state gambling commission acknowledges that there has been a steep learning curve but rejects the notion that the casino development process has gotten off to a poor start.

“I think it’s gone really well,’’ said Stephen Crosby, chairman of the panel, known formally as the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. “It’s a huge undertaking to stand up a new agency from scratch.’’

With that, Crosby said, has come a recognition by the commission that controversy and criticism are as much a part of the casino business as cards and dice.

“We have to learn to be comfortable with the fact that controversy is inevitable,’’ Crosby said.
Lawmakers grumble privately that the people who appointed the commission - the governor, state treasurer, and attorney general - took too long to pick its members, which delayed the commission’s first meeting until April, nearly five months after the Governor Deval Patrick signed the legislation.

Those lost months contributed to the sense that the rollout has been disappointingly slow.
The commissioners work full time, headquartered at 84 State St. - on the lucky seventh floor. With barely any staff hired yet, their working conditions are challenging: under the open meeting law, no more than two commissioners at a time can discuss their work at the office. Even the most mundane decisions must be debated in open public meetings.

In May, in an effort to smooth the day-to-day operations, the commission offered the job of interim executive direct to Stanley McGee, a Patrick administration official, who in 2007 was accused in Florida of child sexual assault. Though the allegation is unproven and McGee was never charged, the commission was accused of failing to properly vet an important hire, and McGee backed out of the job after several days of blistering media coverage.

“Obviously an intense three-day learning experience,’’ Crosby said of the McGee hiring.



Representative Joseph Wagner, a Chicopee Democrat and a key lawmaker in the development of the casino bill last year, recently rebuked Crosby for comments that suggested the commission might license fewer than three resort casinos and a slot parlor, the maximum number of gambling facilities allowed by law.

But Wagner was diplomatic in assessing the start of the state’s casino era. “Given how new this is - new to Massachusetts and to the people involved trying to shape it - it has the appearance of being a little bit of a bumpy rollout,’’ he said. “We’re only two months in with this commission; in that context I don’t have a lot of real complaints.’’ 



This was Rep. Wagner's brilliant comment when an amendment to ban state workers from working in Slot Barns was discussed -- BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST???? ---

“It’s my sense that this matter is so important that we should not preclude the best and the brightest from being eligible even if those people would be in government presently,” said Rep. Joseph Wagner, D-Chicopee, told reporters at the State House.
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/11/chicopee_state_rep_joseph_wagn.html

Crosby points out that during its brief tenure, the commission has hired lawyers and casino consultants to guide the state’s embrace of an industry that still makes many people uneasy. It also recently hired a full-time communications director; is looking for its first executive director; and is moving ahead with plans to prequalify potential developers, which should speed up the application process and provide a sense of momentum.

But most of the casino-related developments in Massachusetts since November have been out of the commission’s hands.

Casino companies have staked their flags on sites around the state, but those markers have not always stayed in place. MGM executives jetted in to announce their choice of tiny Brimfield for a resort, but then sheepishly backed out when they discovered the plans would not work on the site.

[MGM was told by New Jersey to sever its ties to Stanley Ho. Instead, they abandoned Atlantic City.]

Foxborough voters rebuffed a Las Vegas mogul, Steve Wynn, by electing hardened casino opponents to the board of selectmen. Wynn took the hint and dropped his plans for a gambling palace next to Gillette Stadium. He declines to say if he will try again someplace else.

[Let's not ignore that the line on the map got moved in backroom deals to reward Kraft/Wynn or that Wynn is being investigated for FCPA violations - bribing foreign officials and is mired in lawsuits.]

And the casino company of the Boston-born billionaire Sheldon Adelson - a man comfortable betting on long-shots, as evidenced by his contribution of more than $10 million to support Newt Gingrich’s run for president - is passing on Massachusetts entirely, saying the state’s plan for three resorts will dilute the market.

[Sheldon Adelson is being investigated for FCPA violations.]
Even without MGM - which has promised to find another site - Western Massachusetts appears to be a competitive market, with several companies interested.

But the Greater Boston region so far lacks competition. Suffolk Downs in East Boston, in partnership with Caesars Entertainment Corp., is planning to make a bid.

[Caesars, formerly Harrah's, is + $20 BILLION in debt and not making a profit.]

Developer David Nunes says he will bid for a casino in Milford, but has not yet announced a financial partner. [Growing opposition!]

State Senator Stan Rosenberg, an architect of the casino law, said it is too early to bemoan the lack of competition in Greater Boston. [Little man who loves having his ego stroked by Gambling Lobbyists. Profited from Gambling Stock investments, said lobbyists buy access.]

“I don’t think the game is over,’’ Rosenberg said. “I believe there will be significant competition and there are significant players that have an interest in the market.’’


Casino development in Southeastern Massachusetts may be the most unsettled. The casino law walls off the southeast from commercial casinos to give a Native American tribe, presumed to be the Mashpee Wampanoag, the chance to develop a casino under federal law.

But the complex issue of tribal gambling, with its awkward blend of state and US laws, and the aspirations of other tribes, have muddled prospects in the region. Developer KG Urban, which wants to build a casino in New Bedford, has sued for the chance to bid in the southeast. The US District Court upheld the casino law’s provisions for a tribal venue, but the matter will be heard in Appeals Court.

Patrick is in negotiations with the Mashpee over a tribal casino in Taunton. But another tribe, the Pocasset Wampanoag, wants to torpedo the Mashpee’s plans, arguing the Taunton land the Mashpee tribe is claiming is far more historically connected to the Pocasset.



Yet another tribe, the Wampanoag of Aquinnah, has also requested casino negotiations with the governor, which Patrick has refused. The governor cited a longstanding belief among state officials that the Aquinnah have no rights to a tribal casino because of concessions they made to settle a land dispute in the 1980s. The Aquinnah disagree, and the matter seems destined for federal court.


Meanwhile, the Aquinnah have moved ahead with casino plans in Freetown and Lakeville and the tribe has warned it may open a high-stakes bingo parlor on Martha’s Vineyard as a fall-back, testing the state’s position that the Aquinnah cannot host tribal gambling.

THEY CAN'T!

Freetown voters rejected the plan in a nonbinding referendum last week, and Lakeville residents voted Saturday by a 10-to-1 ratio against a proposal to build a casino in their town. (Story, B1)

The rollout of casino gambling in Massachusetts may have been “noisy,’’ said Clyde Barrow, a casino specialist at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, but “despite everything that has gone on, I think it has been comparatively smooth.’’


Barrow said other states had far bumpier rollouts, such as Pennsylvania, which dealt with corruption allegations, and Maryland, which had trouble attracting bidders.

“I think it’s going to be a noisy process all the way to the end and probably afterwards,’’ Barrow said, “but the processes are working so far, and nobody has been indicted.’’

Mark Arsenault can be reached at marsenault@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @bostonglobemark   
 
 

Thursday, May 31, 2012

Ignoring Their Mistakes!

Let's not forget that Senator Rosenberg profits from his Gambling Investments and enjoys providing access to Gambling Lobbyists and having his over-inflated ego stroked.

The failure of the Legislature to conduct an INDEPENDENT COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS says it all.

They don't want to know the facts!

This is merely a distraction to conceal Failed Public Policy!


Top Massachusetts legislator criticizes gaming official for saying state might not license 3 casinos

Published: Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Gambling chief irks procasino lawmaker

State Representative Joseph Wagner proves once again that ignorance prevails on Beacon Hill.

Regardless of the information available, this lawmaker stubbornly clings to misinformation.

The overstated jobs and wildly exaggerated revenues of the Spectrum Report, et al, are easily disproved.





Gambling chief irks procasino lawmaker

By Mark Arsenault

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Massachusetts: Flaws Become Apparent

Disenfranchisement, the loss of voters' participation, was an issue opponents protested in the march to approve Predatory Gambling legislation, consequences be damned!

Too many Massachusetts voters wrongly believed this didn't effect them.

Surprise!

Back room deals and secret meetings seem to have moved Foxborough on the map to make the Bob Kraft/Wynn deal possible.

Is anyone asking?

And then there's that Pedestrian Brdige to Nowhere....and the rail line that will cost Massachusetts taxpayers.....

Who is asking about the appearance of corruption on Beacon Hill?



No say for some who would be casinos’ neighbors
In nearby communities, a feeling of frustration
By Mark Arsenault
Globe Staff

WALPOLE - Mike McCarthy lives close enough to a Gillette Stadium parking lot to smell the hibachi grills on game day. He does not mind Sunday tailgaters a few hundred feet from his house, but he draws the line at a billion-dollar casino.

Though he lives closer than almost anyone to the proposed site of a Wynn Resorts casino, he will not be allowed to participate in a local referendum if the project makes it to a vote. The casino would be in Foxborough; McCarthy lives just over the town line, in South Walpole.

“We don’t get a say,’’ said McCarthy, who has lived behind the stadium parking lot for about two years. “We would have to put our faith in the people of Foxborough, and that is a very powerless feeling.’’

The state legislation that paved the way for casino gambling in Massachusetts, signed by Governor Deval Patrick in November, gives tremendous power to local residents to decide if a casino will be built in their community: No casino project is eligible to compete for a coveted state license until voters in the host town - or, in large cities, the local voting ward - endorse the project in a referendum.

The legislation, however, gives little say to residents in neighboring towns.

Under the law, casino developers must negotiate agreements with these communities to provide money to deal with traffic and other potential spillover problems, but a neighboring town cannot stop a casino by refusing to negotiate or by asking for unreasonable compensation. The state Gaming Commission can bring negotiations between a developer and a neighboring town to conclusion, “in order to allow the applicant to submit a timely and complete application,’’ according to the law.

This has left some residents near proposed casino sites feeling disenfranchised.

John Ribeiro has been a leading opponent of a casino plan at Suffolk Downs. But he and his neighbors are residents of nearby Winthrop and will not be allowed to vote on the project.

“We have residences in Winthrop that are closer to Suffolk Downs than some places in Revere and East Boston,’’ he said. “We can ask for whatever we want from the casino developers, but when you come right down to it, if East Boston and Revere vote for it, there’s going to be a casino there, whether Winthrop wants it or not.’’

The state law expanding gambling in Massachusetts authorizes up to three resort-style casinos, spread among three geographic areas. The Western region has drawn heavy interest from developers, especially along the Massachusetts Turnpike. The operators of the Mohegan Sun casino in Connecticut have proposed a gambling resort in Palmer; MGM Resorts International, one of the largest casino operators in the world, wants to build next door in Brimfield.

The residents of Monson, a town bordering Palmer and Brimfield, are pinched between the two proposals and will have no vote on either project.

“It’s very frustrating,’’ said EmmaLadd Shepherd of Monson, former co-president of the group Quaboag Valley Against Casinos. “It’s one of the reasons the organization started . . . because we could see what was going to happen.’’

The group has lobbied, unsuccessfully, in favor of voting rights for surrounding communities. “We’re a very small town and we have quite a few towns abutting us,’’ she said, adding that a casino nearby “is definitely going to affect us.’’

In crafting the casino legislation, state lawmakers considered the option of extending the vote to surrounding towns, but decided to let those communities address concerns through the agreements for compensation.

“If we went too far one way, we would give communities that might be impacted essentially a veto power over another community’s ability to establish a business within its boundaries,’’ said state Representative Joseph F. Wagner, a Chicopee Democrat who played a leading role in guiding the casino bill to passage. “If we went too far the other way, we wouldn’t recognize the impacts on communities that would clearly be [affected] by the establishment of this new industry.’’

If voters had the power to block projects in other towns, “it’s possible we’d never have a resort casino,’’
[WOULD THAT BE SO BAD?] he said. “Impacted communities could for any number of reasons veto another community’s ability to establish a resort casino. That didn’t seem reasonable, and the reality is that would be contrary to what we were attempting to do by bringing this new industry on line.’’

In Boston, neighboring wards may also be denied a vote on a Suffolk Downs casino. Under state law, proposals in Boston, Springfield, and Worcester can proceed with approval of just the local voting ward, unless the mayor and city council choose to expand the vote citywide.

In Springfield, Ameristar Casinos is planning to compete for development rights, and Mayor Domenic J. Sarno has already called for a citywide vote.

But in Boston, Mayor Thomas M. Menino insists that only voters in East Boston, the neighborhood most directly affected, should have a say in the construction of a casino at Suffolk Downs.
[Mayor Menino fancies himself king, having served beyond his useful lifem now waves his sceptre and decides for an entire City? Maybe it's time to allow the City Council to decide. Maybe it's time to determine what this will cost the City. ]

Councilor Matt O’Malley, who represents West Roxbury and Jamaica Plain, is urging a citywide vote. He said his constituents deserve a say on any casino proposal within the city.

“Constituents of mine, and of all of my colleagues, should have the right to vote on this because it is clearly something that will affect the entire city of Boston, for good or ill,’’ he said. “I say this as someone who is supportive of casinos and would likely vote in favor of one. The fact of the matter is we all pay taxes, which pay for the police and the fire and the infrastructure and all the services.’’

A citywide vote, he said, “would also make the whole process more transparent, cleaner, and better in the long run.’’

“I applaud the mayor of Springfield for calling for a citywide vote because it really does affect the entire city,’’ he said.