Gaming panel enlisted in lawsuit vs. Mohegan

Palmer demands documents

 

 

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

By:

Jack Encarnacao

 

Mohegan Sun’s erstwhile Palmer landlord is roping the state Gaming Commission into its lawsuit that seeks to bar Mohegan from building a casino anywhere but Palmer, demanding the commission turn over any communications between Mohegan and Suffolk Downs that might support the claim that Mohegan undercut its own Palmer casino effort to chase an opportunity in Revere.

Northeast Realty is arguing that any talks Mohegan and its chief executive Mitchell Etess had with Suffolk Downs before the casino developer lost a referendum in Palmer would violate an exclusivity agreement.

“The public records request to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission seeks to identify any communications conducted between representatives of Mohegan Sun including its attorney, Kevin C. Conroy, relating to the Suffolk Downs property, and the MGC including, but not limited to, commission staff and its Investigations and Enforcement Bureau,” Northeast spokesman Paul Robbins said in a statement.

Commission spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll said the commission’s legal staff is reviewing the request, and does “not have a comment on the lawsuit at this time.”

The request, addressed to chairman Stephen Crosby and dated Feb. 28, asks for copies of any communications from Jan. 1, 2013, to Nov. 30, 2013, between the commission and a series of individuals “concerning the possibility or consideration of Mohegan’s participating in any way in the application for a license for and/or development of a gaming facility anywhere on the Suffolk Downs Property.”

The individuals include:

•   Suffolk Downs principals Richard Fields and Joseph O’Donnell.

•   House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and staff.

• Any attorneys or lobbyists associated with the law firms Foley Hoag and DLA Piper, who work for Mohegan.

• The public relations firm O’Neill and Associates, which represents Mohegan.

•   Former state Rep. Kathi-Ann Reinstein (D-Revere) and staff.

•     State Sen. Anthony Petruccelli (D-East Boston) and staff.
Mohegan Sun declined to comment on the records request.
Northeast Realty, which wants Mohegan to abandon its lease on the Palmer site, hit Revere Mayor Dan Rizzo with the same records request in January. Revere’s solicitor responded that a search of voicemail and email records of Rizzo and his immediate staff “failed to produce any records responsive to your public records request.”

http://bostonherald.com/business/business_markets/2014/03/gaming_panel_enlisted_in_lawsuit_vs_mohegan

Revere Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein to resign......lawmaker to lobbyist

Ahhh.....is this to get ready for some cushy Casino Job down the road?

Revere Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein to resign

Reinstein, a backer of casinos and House Speaker DeLeo, to take post with Boston Beer Company

By Jim O’Sullivan

| Globe Staff January 02, 2014

Kayana Szymczak for the Boston Globe

Kathi-Anne Reinstein, one of Speaker Robert DeLeo’s top deputies and a backer of a Revere casino, plans to take a post with Boston Beer Company.

One of Massachusetts House Speaker Robert DeLeo’s top deputies plans to resign this month, according to people familiar with the decision, a move that would also remove from House leadership a chief advocate for a casino in Revere.

Representative Kathi-Anne Reinstein, first elected to the House in 1998, plans to step down to accept a post as government affairs manager for the Boston Beer Company, said people with knowledge of her decision.

The company, which brews Sam Adams beer, has been shopping for a government affairs executive for months, eliciting interest from several prominent figures in local politics.

Reinstein’s decision comes at a pivotal time in the ongoing debate about where to site a Massachusetts casino. The Revere Democrat has been a vocal proponent for Suffolk Downs and a Mohegan Sun facility in Revere, after East Boston residents last year voted down such a venue in their neighborhood.

Her departure also takes out a top ally of DeLeo. Reinstein has been a staunch DeLeo backer since early in his campaign to become speaker, and serves as an assistant majority leader in the House.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/01/02/revere-rep-kathi-anne-reinstein-backer-casinos-and-house-speaker-deleo-resign/dg13kIWNkV2tpxD00YTnuN/story.html



Rude & Ruder: The Kathi-Anne Reinstein Story

I don't know if any of you have ever tired to get your elected representatives to actually listen to you, but I have.

Once, as I stood with my NO CASINO sign on the sidewalk, my State rep pulled up in his boat of a car, bellowed something mostly unintelligible out the window, then sped off into the distance waving his cigar as I called and motioned - to no avail - for him to return and have a conversation.

When I went to see him at his office at the State House, his contemptuous slimeball of aide left me in tears.

I have repeatedly, and with little success, requested that a selectman from my town attend meetings of the 17 Town Regional Task Force on Casino Impacts.

Last year, my ardently pro-slots state senator made a brazen attempt to stop a public meeting of this same task force in Carver.

This task force, which represents a quarter-million people in Southeast Mass., has yet to have been granted an audience with the Governor - though he frequently meets with the 1,500 member Cape Cod Indian tribe which wants to build the world's biggest casino there.

Back in 2007, after writing to my congressmen (members of the same governing body which made suburban tribal mega casinos a reality) about my concerns regarding the Middleboro casino project, I received a brief, and utterly clueless, letter from Ted Kennedy's office thanking me for my interest in immigration reform.

And I'm still waiting to hear from John Kerry.

Sad thing is, I've actually voted for these guys. Many times over the years.

And it's not just the big guys. I've also been gaveled to silence in my own town hall, and witnessed similar gaveling in Middleboro whenever concerns were raised about having the world's biggest casino as a neighbor.

A ballot vote by residents there opposing the casino project was unanimously deemed "irrelevant" by local selectmen and as a result not forwarded to the Secretary of the Interior.

And, thanks to a labyrinth of regulations seemingly modeled after the game of Battleship, the fact that my community is not a host community, even though it would potentially abut a newly created sovereign nation and the world's largest casino, the Federal government denies my town so much as a say-so in the matter.

But what does any of it matter anyway since I'm frequently reminded by the media that my representatives and I are completely powerless - because the only one who does matter in Massachusetts is whoever is currently filling the shoes of the Speaker of the House.

So I shouldn't even bother trying.

But I do try. I've held my sign, done lots of research, collected signatures, given testimony, written letters, blogged, made videos, built web sites, given interviews, attended myriads of meetings, participated in events across the state, arranged educational forums, written fact sheets, sent out mailings, maintained databases, and have put up with pro-casino abuse ranging from having F-bomb's hurled at my children to receiving a threat on my life.

And I'm just one member of the team.

Thankfully, in the second half of last year, we started seeing our efforts start to make a difference. We managed to get the facts out to the Mass. Democratic Party convention - which then adopted a resolution opposing slots.

The Attorney General's top staff, the Governor's top staff, and even the Governor himself let us make our case about the real costs of slots and casinos - after which both the Governor and Attorney General endorsed having the Commonwealth perform a fresh, independent cost-benefit analysis of expanded gambling.

But despite the compelling facts and recent inroads, it still amazes me how little understanding there is about our message among legislators and the general public.

Pigeon-holed as 'moralists', or painted as an axe-wielding, fun-stealing cadre of Carrie Nations whose mission is to deprive individuals of their private liberties and the State of much needed jobs and revenue - a characterization aided and abetted by the media and assorted anonymous comment section hoopla - our message is lost.

And so, in an attempt to more clearly define that message, to frame it in easy-to-understand, graphical, economic terms, we managed, last Thursday, to pack a room at the Statehouse with reps and their aides to present "A Mathbook for Beacon Hill".

More than a dozen people volunteered their time, expertise and resources to the project for over two months. Many of us took the day off from work and drove in from across the state to be available to answer questions at the presentation - which countered the inflated figures for jobs and revenue we keep hearing about, along with the invariably non-existent costs that accompany them.

But what do the efforts of a bunch of concerned taxpaying volunteers matter when a solitary, paid legislator and big-time slot cheerleader like State Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein (D - Suffolk Downs) can mosey down from her office, sit through the meeting like a fidgety 5th grader who'd sold her last Ritalin for a snickers bar, then proceed to hijack the Q & A as her own personal pro-slots soapbox?

After purposely having framed our presentation to specifically address economic impacts - partly in response to accusations by Kathi and others like her who've repeatedly tried to characterize the opposition's message as one of moral imperative over financial reality - Kathi proceeded to use our meeting to bend the message back to addiction and social costs.

And before long, Kathi-Anne the pro-slots cheerleader becomes Kathi the slot-wielding human bullhorn, dripping with sarcasm, reeking of indignation, dismissive, bombastic and rude.

Attempts to reign her in, requests that she phrase her comments in the form of an actual question were utterly ignored. This was "a public meeting!" after all, she insisted! She had the right to be heard.

That's right, because just like those of us who worked hard to set up this meeting sans a staff, who don't get to vote on expanded gambling legislation, who've been repeatedly ignored by many of our own elected leaders in favor of track owners, lobbyists and others, who are outspent by gambling interests $2 million to one and are invariably regulated to the last quote on the second page of virtually every news article on the subject, Kathi-Anne appears to actually be afraid that someone won't hear her.

Actually.

Which, from what I've seen of Kathi-Anne Reinstein, is downright impossible.

After pontificating for a good fifteen minutes (and at least a quarter of our allotted time) on just about everything from license plates to cigarettes to adopting thoroughbred horses, Kathi-Anne finally asks that all too familiar and predictable question:

"If not gambling, what other ideas do yoooooooooou have for coming up with new jobs and revenue."

Okay, look. I've heard this same question from everyone from small town selectmen to Sen. Marc Pacheco, to that slimeball in Dave Flynn's office.

And really, I don't hold it against Kathi that between her horse-based life experiences and limited intellectual abilities, she can't wrap her head around better, creative solutions that won't end up helping the gambling industry more than citizens of Massachusetts.

Or that she, who at an October 2009 hearing referred to her constituents as "not exactly rocket scientists" with an existing array of gambling problems, is in favor of creating future generations of addicts in her district in order to save them all a bus ride to Connecticut.

Or that the woman who once championed making the fluffernutter the official sandwich of Massachusetts isn't perhaps incapable of comprehending the serious ramifications that legalizing slots could have for other communities and taxpayers outside the confines of her district.

Heck, after three years of observing a certain percentage of the people who make up the Massachusetts legislature, including Kathi-Anne, you won't catch me holding my breath waiting for them to come up with a better solution than expanded gambling.

No, the thing that really gets me is that State Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein had the unmitigated, sanctimonious gaul to face a group of unpaid citizen volunteers, including health educators and web designers and demand that they - they - provide her with alternative revenue sources.

Because heck, isn't that her job. Isn't that's what she's paid to do. Paid by us?

We all have jobs to do. So, are we free to call Kathi up and ask her how to do them?

Should medical doctors stop to confer with Kathi-Anne when stumped for a cure for their patient?

Perhaps demolitions experts should keep Kathi on speed dial in case they have to ask "should I cut the blue or the red wire."

Of course not. But this isn't the real world, it's the Commonwealth of Kathi-Anne - where she gets paid to try to make you look bad for not being able to do her job.

Which begs the question, aside from ignoring constituents, failing to perform due diligence, pretending not to fawn over special interests, supporting bad ideas, promoting unhealthy sandwiches to school children, talking too much, listening too little, collecting pensions for life and expecting other people to do their job, what is it, exactly, that today's legislators do?

I can tell you this - most of them haven't even taken the time to look at this website.

Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps we should add "being busy already knowing everything there is to know about slots" to that impressive legislative job description?

Because the more people know about this industry, the more they're likely to oppose it. Or, at least, more likely to demand a DEEPER LOOK.

Which is why people like me wait patiently for the Q & A session at the end of another long meeting, if they allow one at all, and then carefully phrase our comments in the form of a question. We wait for a year to give 5 minutes testimony to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and two and a half years to testify for 3 minutes at the State House. We wait our turn, for 13 hours, folded up like a human lawn chair in an over-crowded auditorium, to speak for less than a minute.

We work, unpaid, and play - if you can call it that- by the rules.

And that's the real problem, isn't it. It's why lobbyists spread around big money behind the scenes, and why legislators make quiet deals with the devil behind closed doors. Why unions pay their members to pack halls in distant towns, and why policy analysis turned industry shills label us, without grasping a shred of irony, the 'chattering class'.

Kathi wasn't afraid that her peers at the State House wouldn't hear her - she was terrified that, for once, they might actually hear us.



http://gladyskravitz.blogspot.com/2010/02/rude-ruder-kathi-anne-reinstein-story.html

 

Bait & Switch: Subversion of the Democratic Process......yet again.....

The information below highlights why REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL is the only reasonable solution....

NoPlainvilleRacino

No Eastie Casino's new video to the gambling commission is incredible. PLEASE watch to see how far off course the process of licensing casinos is in Massachusetts:

Proof the Mohegan Sun Casino Proposal is Not What Revere Voters Approved on Nov. 5

Thumbs Up for the Great Folks Opposing Suffolk Downs Predatory Gambling Barn!

Give a Thumbs Up for Thumbs Down on a Suffolk Downs/Caesars Slot Barn!

Nice morning but freezing! Lets freeze out those on Election Day who are forcing our hand to protest. The plus this morning? Rep DeLeo drove by! That's right Sir, NO CASINO!

No Eastie Casino! Thumbs up!

We are standing out at Short Beach Winthrop/ Revere line 7:30 am Friday.

Saturday am 8:30-10am stop and shop wonderland.

It was a cold morning but we need to keep the word out! Please, don't let us freeze in vain! Vote out Deleo, Petrucelli and Reinstein. They left us ALL out in the cold!!

 

 

 

 

It was a cold morning but we need to keep the word out! Please, don't let us freeze in vain! Vote out Deleo, Petrucelli and Reinstein. They left us ALL out in the cold!!

 

 

 

 

What they don't want you to know!

The casino debate’s Achilles’ heel
"Problem gamblers" account for a disproportionate share of casino revenues
BY: Michael Jonas
September 15, 2011

Richard McGowan, a professor at Boston College’s Carroll School of Management and a leading researcher on gambling, has called compulsive gambling the “Achilles’ heel” of the casino industry.

He’s right, of course, so the industry and its allies in government -- which now include Beacon Hill’s three top powerbrokers -- do their best to keep that painful foot well wrapped and taped, at least long enough for a casino bill to hobble over the goal line and be signed into law.

Problem gamblers, those who lose the mortgage money or the car keys or who leave their family otherwise strapped because they can’t put the brakes on their losses, are always treated by the industry and its army of lobbyists as more of an annoying distraction in the casino debate than the significant part of the gambling landscape they seem to represent. Gaming -- the sanitized term favored by the gambling companies and political allies -- is an entertainment industry, proponents insist, a place where the dashing men and shapely, party-dress adorned women seen in Foxwoods television ads enjoy an elegant night out, soaking in “the wonder of it all.”

To support that view, proponents invariably point to studies suggesting that just 1 or 2 percent of the adult population suffers from some degree of compulsive gambling. Other research says the figure could be somewhat higher, as much as 4 or 5 percent. But regardless of the exact number, it’s not actually the figure that should be of concern.

Whatever the prevalence of compulsive gamblers in the general population, they obviously account for a much larger share of those who actually visit casinos and a disproportionate share of casino revenues.

Just how much of the revenue casinos bring in is from the losses of those with gambling problems?

One of the most thorough studies of this issue was done in 2004 in Ontario, where researchers had a sample of residents maintain diaries logging their gambling expenditures. The study, prepared for the government-supported Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, estimated that 35 percent of Ontario casino revenues were derived from moderate to severe problem gamblers. Such gamblers accounted for 30 percent of revenue from casino table games and a whopping 62 percent of revenue from slot machines.

“It’s a huge cost borne by a small proportion of the population,” says Earl Grinols, a Baylor University economics professor who has done extensive research on the casino industry.

The research suggests problem gamblers are an integral part of the industry’s revenue model, not an unfortunate byproduct of the intoxicating hold casinos have on some people. Understandably, that is a tough pill for casino proponents to swallow.

Gov. Deval Patrick, when asked Wednesday morning following a speech to a Boston business convention whether the idea that such a large share of casino revenue comes from problem gamblers gives him pause, said, “Well, it’s given me some pause. Of course, we have $1.5 billion worth of Massachusetts gamblers today who spend that money just in Connecticut,” he said. “What we get from the casino bill is some dedicated funds, and more of those funds, to try to address the issue of problem gambling,” he said, referring to provisions in the legislation that would direct money from casinos to fund compulsive gambling assistance programs and research.

But Patrick nonetheless seemed to reframe the issue in terms of the overall low prevalence of problem gambling, not the share of casino revenue it accounts for, saying most studies “point to the very small proportion of people for whom this is not just harmless entertainment.”

Speaker Robert DeLeo, who is championing the casino bill that passed the House Wednesday night, scoffed at the idea that problem gamblers account for a sizable chunk of casino revenue when asked about it following a speech last year to the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce.

State Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein, whose Revere district shares with DeLeo’s Winthrop-based district the Suffolk Downs and Wonderland racetracks, has been impassioned in her call for expanded gambling as a job generator for desperate constituents who have been hit hard by the recession. “This is a jobs bill,” she says. “It is something that my district literally is praying for.”

But when asked whether she is concerned about a third of casino revenue potentially coming from the pockets of problem gamblers, Reinstein simply refused to accept the premise. “I don’t agree with that research,” she said. “I don’t think that’s a reality.”

Never let the FACTS get in the way of a BAD decision!

It may be an uncomfortable reality, says Grinols, the Baylor economist, but it is a reliable estimate that’s been well established at this point. Grinols says the casino industry could probably still be profitable without money from problem gamblers. Of course that would throw off all the projections about jobs and revenue to state coffers, figures that are already pretty shaky. He says it would also require imposing limits on casino hours (the pending bill authorizes casinos to operate 24 hours a day), banning ATMs from gambling facilities, and other measures the industry is loath to accept.

Without such aggressive steps, Grinols said in a 2005 CommonWealth story, states are turning the traditional role of government on its head. “This is an industry, like it or not, that is making its money off the sickness of its clients,” he said. “Government is supposed to be the protector and guardian of the community, not the predator.”


http://www.commonwealthmagazine.org/Voices/Back-Story/2011/Summer/010-The-casino-debates-Achilles-heel.aspx

From: Stop Predatory Gambling

Government needs to get out of the predatory gambling business because it is a failed policy. This excellent story by Michael Jonas goes to the very heart why the policy is such a major failure.

The reason why predatory gambling supporters rarely stray from their scripted "jobs" message is because no one wants to discuss or defend the truth that casinos (and lotteries) are almost totally dependent on creating and exploiting addicts.

To put the phony "jobs" narrative in context: there are presently more people in Illinois who have come forward to be banned from the casinos there because they are addicted - what the predatory gambling business calls the "self-exclusion list" - than there are people who work at the casinos in that state.

The question that Jonas asked is one of the key questions every journalist needs to be asking until it is thoroughly answered: "What percentage of casino and lottery profits come from problem gamblers?"

Perhaps then someone will ask the even bigger question which is how can government, in a nation founded on the ideal that everyone is equal, relentlessly promote a policy that renders the lives of hundreds of thousands of citizens to be virtually worthless? Who lobbies for the Lottery Class?  

    

Saugus: The Propaganda and Fairy Tales Begins!

State Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein D-Revere wants Massachusetts taxpayers to pay $500 MILLION for 1,000 jobs?

Isn't that $500,000 per job?

Such a deal!

And we all know how open-minded Kathi-Anne is after watching her disrupt a meeting!

Do you suppose she told them this? :

From: Phony Beacon Hill Numbers

Murray, meanwhile, told the Cape Cod Times over the weekend that she believed slot machines "suck all the economic environment from within 20 miles, and you really don't get any jobs from it."

From: "Cha Ching" Murray: SLOTS suck $$$ from economy

...Senate President Terry Murray admitted in a speech last week reported by the State House News Service, casinos pose a serious threat to existing businesses and cultural institutions.

Saugus chamber considers casino questions
By Matt Tempesta / The Daily Item

SAUGUS — Gambling took center stage at the Saugus Chamber of Commerce’s annual breakfast Tuesday morning, as elected officials and representatives from Suffolk Downs fielded questions about the effects a potential casino could have on Saugus businesses.

Around 60 people attended the breakfast at the Hilltop Steak House on Route 1, including state Sen. Tom McGee D-Lynn, State Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein D-Revere and Chip Tuttle, the Chief Operating Officer of Suffolk Downs.

As a former employee at Wonderland Racetrack, Reinstein said she believes in the opportunity gaming brings to the area.

“The opportunity to create jobs and infrastructure and growing the economy, the possibility of developers working with businesses, it’s a very exciting time,” said Reinstein.

And who pray tell will pay that $500 MILLION for the INFRASTRUCTURE?

Why it must be the Massachusetts taxpayers you'll stick with the bill!

Reinstein said she couldn’t put a timetable on the project because a gambling commission hasn’t been formed yet.

“It’s a very long process,” she said.

Tuttle said he sees Suffolk Downs as a “gateway to the North Shore,” and noted that a new casino there would only build on its 77-year-old relationship with surrounding communities, especially local businesses.

“I think Suffolk Downs has a legacy as a good neighbor,” said Tuttle. “We’re going to look to businesses to be suppliers, there’s no need for us to source suppliers from North Carolina, the legislation doesn’t allow us to. We’re going to look to have small business partnerships and we think we could have a considerable effect on the Boston area’s already strong tourism economy.


Apparently, know one bothered with the facts that this will kill TOURISM:

Solid data show that when casinos come to heritage tourism towns, visitation to the historic resource plummets as it did in Vicksburg, Miss., where 40 percent of the historic downtown is now shuttered.

From: By Overwhelming Margins, Pennsylvania Voters Oppose Gettysburg Casino Proposal


Reinstein said Saugus is in a unique spot between tourist destinations like Boston and Salem, which will help businesses along Route 1 if a casino is built at Suffolk Downs

“Community involvement is paramount in this legislation,” said Reinstein. “Saugus is in an incredible position because it’s Route 1 with all of the businesses. There are so many good restaurants and the whole vendor program in the bill says (developers) can’t get their contracts out of state. We’re keeping our tax dollars here and we’re keeping out business here. It’s a great pro-business piece of legislation.”

Sean Grant, the director of the Chamber of Commerce, was happy with the turnout Tuesday, and said he hopes to keep the chamber growing over the next year.

“If we continue this process, we’ll be able to double this next year,” said Grant. “The response has been great by the business community.”

End to backroom deals? Time for change!

As a voter, do you find the arrogance of Beacon Hill offensive?

Like this -

On Monday, Kathi-Anne Reinstein, a Revere Democrat who organized the SECRET CLOSED DOOR briefing, told the News Service the session was closed TO THE PUBLIC so state reps would "feel comfortable to ask any questions without having any type of criticism'' and surely at the request of gambling interests who can make undisputed wild promises that are unsubstantiated and never be held accountable.

From: Beacon Hill: Democracy dies at gambling interests' request

Huh? Elected officials aren't adults? Maybe Kathi-Anne isn't.

Legislation was crafted behind closed doors, in secret meetings, excluding the public and the media.

Isn't it time for transparency?

There are provisions within the current expanded gambling proposal that were written to genuflect to the Gambling Industry. Slot Barns employees as ESSENTIAL? Only if you genuflect!

FREE ALCOHOL? Not every state has it. Beacon Hill simply can't do enough for the Gambling Industry!

Extending FREE ALCOHOL to 'level the playing field' makes each of us innocent targets of the Gambling Industry to simply keep Gambling Addicts playing and to line their pockets, at the expense of those being killed by drunks.

Folks, Get a grip!

Did you find Senator Rosenberg's shenanigans suspect?

Do you have a problem with Senator Rosenberg's comment:
Senator Stan Rosenberg: “What lobbyists and interest groups buy is access’’

Below is a BEGINNING - merely a beginning that needs to be accompanied with some serious ETHICS REFORM to restore public confidence.

And, oh! By the way - maybe a 5 year self-exclusion for lawmakers might make sense.

Whose government is this, anyway?

Open government advocates push meeting, public record reforms
By David Riley
gatehouse news service

BOSTON —
Government transparency advocates hope backroom casino talks and recent Beacon Hill scandals will lend new momentum to legislation that would toughen open meeting and public record laws this year.

Supporters especially hope to pass one of several bills to finally end the Legislature’s self-granted exemption from the state’s Open Meeting Law.

“They’re doing the people’s business,” said Robert Ambrogi, an attorney and executive director of the Massachusetts Newspaper Publishers Association. Other pending legislation would:

Make public records easier to obtain electronically and at a lower cost.

Give the state’s supervisor of public records greater authority.

Impose stiffer penalties for violating the Open Meeting Law.

Some legislators said they see a need for such measures as much as ever.

“I think that with the casino debate, we saw exactly what behind-the-door politics is all about in Massachusetts,” said state Rep. Marc Lombardo, R-Billerica.

One example reformists cite is when State Sen. Jamie Eldridge, D-Acton, proposed an amendment for a five-year ban on former lawmakers taking jobs in the casino industry during Senate debate on the bill
After fellow legislators slammed the idea, senators met in a closed-door caucus before emerging to pass a one-year limit instead. Eldridge said changes to the amendment should have been hashed out publicly.

The Legislature passed several changes to the Open Meeting Law that went into effect a year ago. The updates set new guidelines for government boards to post agendas and keep minutes, and shifted enforcement of the law from district attorneys to the attorney general.

Some town and city officials complained the changes were unclear, costly or both.
Moving enforcement to Attorney General Martha Coakley’s office was a good move that has raised the law’s profile, as well as public awareness of violations, Ambrogi said.

In one recent ruling, the attorney general had found that the Brockton Water Commission violated the state Open Meeting Law when the board met behind closed doors in August 2010 amid the water-billing crisis.

And Coakley announced this month that her office had created a searchable database of all its rulings on investigations into Open Meeting Law violation complaints.

But reformists want more. In cases of apparently intentional violations, a bill sponsored by Rep. Anthony Cabral, D-New Bedford, would allow civil fines not only against a public board, but individual members, up to $200 per violation. It would also allow citizens who file court actions to enforce the Open Meeting Law to recover attorneys’ fees and court costs.

Recent scandals, including former House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi’s conviction on corruption charges, have raised new questions about why lawmakers should be above a law meant to discourage corruption, Ambrogi said.

“To me, that’s always seemed hypocritical,” he said. Several bills would end that exemption.

More than 20 newspapers endorsed many of these reforms, with backing from the Mass. Newspaper Publishers Association, the American Civil Liberties Union, Common Cause, the New England First Amendment Coalition and the New England Newspaper and Press Association.

Beacon Hill's Arrogance & Business as Usual

In the latest saga of Beacon Hill's arrogance, the Boston Globe offered:

O’Brien resigns amid scandal
Probation chief says he has been made a scapegoat

Rather than being scapegoated, the comments below lead one to believe that O'Brien was inadequately qualified for his position beyond being a successful lackey, providing jobs for the well-connected to curry favor --

If O’Brien’s demise lay in fixing jobs for political insiders, it was a skill he learned early. In fact, that practice may have begun on the day in 1998 when he became the state’s seventh commissioner of probation.

In 1984, when his predecessor was appointed, the top job at probation required a master’s degree or doctorate. O’Brien has a sociology degree from Boston College.

Ware found evidence that the late John J. Irwin Jr., the chief justice for administration and management in 1998, “made the qualifications for commissioner less rigorous so that O’Brien would qualify.’’

Irwin was an early and important influence on O’Brien’s rise to power at the Probation Department. He tapped O’Brien to be his key aide as legislative liaison for the Administrative Office of the Trial Court.

They both attended Boston College, and Irwin’s interest in O’Brien’s career would prove to be seminal. When Irwin showed up on Beacon Hill, lobbying on behalf of the Trial Court and its budget, O’Brien was his shadow.

That led to lasting and fruitful relationships in the Legislature, such as those with former House speaker Thomas M. Finneran and Representative Thomas M. Petrolati. O’Brien parlayed those connections to boost his budget and deflect challenges from judges, union chiefs, and other public safety officials who chafed at his secretive and pugnacious style.

Republicans weigh in --

Bruce Tarr, who will become the Senate minority leader next week, called O’Brien’s resignation “a positive development.’’

“But I think it would be a mistake to think that we don’t have serious reforms yet to make,’’ Tarr said. “The conditions that allowed the improprieties to happen are still in place, despite the fact that a key player is leaving.’’

House minority leader Bradley H. Jones Jr., Republican of North Reading, called the departure of O’Brien “long overdue, however an appropriate way to usher in the New Year.’’

“It is my hope that this will be the first step in the long, difficult process of cleaning up what is known to be a very corrupt Probation Department,’’ Jones said.

The actions of Republicans will define their sincerity.

Previously offered: Wait until you see the patronage Gambling brings!

The media, including the Boston Globe, remained silent as closed door meetings were conducted with the Gambling Industry to compose flawed legislation that was presented shortly before floor debates.

Posted here: Mushroom Farming Flourishes on Beacon Hill
(Mushroom Farming is what it is: Grown in the dark and fed a diet of manure. And it's flourishing on Beacon Hill.)

Kathi-Anne Reinstein, a Revere Democrat who
organized the SECRET CLOSED DOOR briefing,
told the News Service the session was closed
TO THE PUBLIC so state reps would
"feel comfortable to ask any questions without
having any type of criticism'' and surely at the
request of gambling interests who can make
undisputed wild promises that are unsubstantiated
and never be held accountable.

So why did DeLeo close the caucus to
the public and the press? What is he trying
to hide?
The most likely answer is that keeping
serious discussions secret is the default
setting on Beacon Hill. When in doubt,
lock everyone out.
The practice of having its most important
debates behind closed doors, and the
arrogance that practice reflects, has
everything to do with the Legislature’s
lack of credibility with the public. It may
be unfair, even inaccurate, to assume
corruption thrives behind locked doors
in the Statehouse, but DeLeo and his
colleagues only feed that notion with their
actions.

The media, including the Boston Globe, remained silent when 'public hearings' were conducted that failed to include gambling opponents, or at best, limited their time, or placed opponents last on the agenda, after the media cycle, effectively silencing them.

The problem goes far deeper than the Probation Dept. and needs to be probed.

The problem defines an attitude of leadership on Beacon Hill that believes it is immune from transparency and blessed with Divine Insight.

It's easy to ignore things like:

"There's evidence out that shows the cost for every dollar these casinos bring in costs the taxpayers about 2.1 dollars in social costs. It's a dangerous thing."

when your mind is already made up, with the assistance of gambling lobbyists.

By shutting me out of those sham meetings, you have convinced me you're hiding something. It's time to ask "what?"

Wait until you see the patronage Gambling brings!

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has a long, proud history of patronage and sleazy deals, some merely smelling faintly rotten, others clearly so.

While the Boston Globe has accomplished a long overdue examination of the "Probation Dept.," was there ever an article about the closed door meetings with the Gambling Industry? For starters, House Speaker "Racino" DeLeo and Kathi-Anne Reinstein sleep with the Industry and the Globe doesn't notice?

Was there ever anything other than meager opposition comments from the Boston Globe Cheerleaders promoting the "Wonder of it All"?

Has the Boston Globe ever reported on the failure of Beacon Hill to conduct an Independent Cost Benefit Analysis on the costs and impacts of Gambling, as New Hampshire did?

Officials helped kin get jobs in probation
State ethics laws clearly forbid such attempts at influence

Probation inquiry shifts to Legislature
Grand jury subpoenas House, Senate files

Suggestions of patronage, nepotism and corruption go deeper than the Probation Dept.

Just wondering! A curious observation!

Mushroom Farming Flourishes on Beacon Hill

Mushroom Farming is what it is: Grown in the dark and fed a diet of manure. And it's flourishing on Beacon Hill.

In November, little noticed, I posted Beacon Hill: Democracy dies at gambling interests' request

Kathi-Anne Reinstein, a Revere Democrat who organized the SECRET CLOSED DOOR briefing, told the News Service the session was closed TO THE PUBLIC so state reps would "feel comfortable to ask any questions without having any type of criticism'' and surely at the request of gambling interests who can make undisputed wild promises that are unsubstantiated and never be held accountable.

OTB was crammed through after secret meetings and a voice vote.

Arrogance Prevails on Beacon Hill

So why did DeLeo close the caucus to the public and the press? What is he trying to hide?
The most likely answer is that keeping serious discussions secret is the default setting on Beacon Hill. When in doubt, lock everyone out.
The practice of having its most important debates behind closed doors, and the arrogance that practice reflects, has everything to do with the Legislature’s lack of credibility with the public. It may be unfair, even inaccurate, to assume corruption thrives behind locked doors in the Statehouse, but DeLeo and his colleagues only feed that notion with their actions.

House Speaker "Slots" DeLeo has two 'race tracks' in his district and is conducting meetings behind closed doors with whom?

The Industry?

There are many surrounding issues that require open, public and transparent discussions.

Who will pay the cost of the infrastructure required for DeLeo's fantasy being one of the most expensive?

How is the Speaker determining what should be in the legislation? Is it being based on promises made behind closed doors?

The voters expressed their disgust at the voting booth when they sent Scott Brown to Washington.


Why the secrecy, Mr. Speaker? Something to hide?

Mr. Speaker, why do you oppose an Independent Cost Benefit Analysis that the Governor, the AG, the Mass Chiefs of Police Assn., and others support? Are you afraid of the results?

Rep. Steve Canessa who represents a portion of Middleboro?

Taunton Gazette


State Rep. Stephen Canessa, D-New Bedford, said he hoped Southeastern Massachusetts would be selected to host one of the resort casinos. But if Boston and a site in western Massachusetts are awarded license, he might reconsider his vote.
"Boston gets enough. They don't need another resort attraction," he said.

Or making a comment about totally overinflated revenues at a non-public meeting that get quoted like this:


State Sen. Marc Pacheco, D-Taunton, said slot parlors and casinos could deliver $1 billion to state coffers, helping to fill the state's $2.5 billion structural deficit.

Or this?

Before a gathering of about 100 business professionals, [Rep. David] Flynn publicized the dates for the highly-anticipated gambling hearings in the House of Representatives.

Rep. "Racino" Flynn attended a non-public meeting and annouced the dates of the House casino/slot hearing are April 14, 15, 16.

Scheduling hearings, but not publicly posting the dates?

Why is this secret?

The last series of meetings were emailed directly to those with a "vested" interest, like the owner of Plainridge.

This needs to change!

If you don't want to be accused of corruption and back room dealing by the public, maybe you should amend your conduct.

Rep. Reinstein: At least she's consistent

Patrick wants new cost-benefit analysis on gambling

BOSTON — Gov. Deval L. Patrick is pressing lawmakers to request a new, independent analysis of the costs and benefits of increased gambling, even as lawmakers hammer out the details of a casino bill that could be debated as early as next month.

Patrick made his comments when asked Thursday about an hourlong meeting he had this week inside his office with casino opponents, who are pushing for the new study.

“I think the points that were made when we met about refreshing the analysis of both the economic cost-benefit and also the human impact are very well taken,” Patrick told reporters. “I have commended that idea forward to the Speaker and the Senate President.”

Patrick’s comments come as gambling foes are upping the ante in their bid to block casinos in Massachusetts — enlisting the aid of former Gov. Michael S. Dukakis and former state Attorney General Scott Harshbarger.

Both were slated to talk at an anti-gambling forum at Faneuil Hall moderated by City Year co-founder Alan Khazei, the former Democratic U.S. Senate candidate.

Kathleen Conley Norbut, president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts said the state deserves more detailed information before dramatically increasing gambling.

“We think that all people in the spectrum should have some sound data around this to make decisions and that has not been done,” she said. “It’s a new world. It’s a new economy.”

Harshbarger said increased gambling is not a fiscal panacea and is far outweighed by social costs, including increased gambling addiction and crime.

Harshbarger also said he was concerned about a rush to push through casino legislation in the midst of an economic crisis.

“There is simply no economic or public policy justification,” he said. “I believe that the more people talk about it, the more information they have, the less likely it is that people will go this route.”

Casino supporters say the issues have been studied enough.

They say they realize that casinos won’t solve the state’s fiscal troubles. But they say it will help stop the flow of gambling dollars out of the state while also providing new jobs for those out of work.

State Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein, D-Revere, whose district includes Wonderland Greyhound Park, said those jobs are desperately needed in her hometown.

“You can do a cost-benefit analysis every day in Revere at the Northgate Mall when you see the buses leaving for Connecticut,” which has casino gambling, Reinstein said. “We could waste time and money doing another (study) or put something in place that would put people to work and have revenue coming in immediately.”

In addition to stifling Democracy and fearing criticism (Beacon Hill: Democracy dies at gambling interests' request, What kind of democracy....? , Beacon Hill: Secrecy and Closed Door Sessions Prevail), State Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein, D-Revere has joined the ranks of those counting license plates. Foxwoods defaulted on loan payments and Mohegun Sun, in spite of glowing promises, cancelled a major expansion.

Maybe Beacon Hill hasn't noticed the casino/racino bankruptcies, defaults, foreclosures and "re-structuring" going on around the country, believing that life stops at the borders.

The economy has changed and so have the previous projections about predatory gambling. Since no impartial cost benefit analysis has been conducted, maybe it's time to do so.

Is Rep. Reinstein afraid of FACTS as well?

The renewed interest in gaming hasn’t gone unnoticed, with pro-gambling groups ramping up their lobbying efforts in Massachusetts.

In 2005, companies and groups pushing legalized gambling spent $764,500 on lobbyists to press their message on Beacon Hill. During the first six months of 2009, those same interests surpassed that total, pouring $777,983 into lobbying.

Casino foes say they know they are being outspent on Beacon Hill, but still hope to win over enough lawmakers to block any casino legislation with an aggressive grass-roots push.

One of the biggest questions is how much sentiment toward casinos has changed among lawmakers.

The last vote on casinos was in March 2008, when the House voted 106-48 to send a casino licensing bill to a study committee, effectively killing it for the session. That vote came when former Democratic House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi — a casino opponent — was in office.

Today’s House Speaker, Robert A. DeLeo, D-Winthrop, and Senate President Therese Murray, D-Plymouth, have both said they support casino gambling.

How can Beacon Hill leadership support something when they don't know what the costs will be?

Patrick said that while he has recommended a fresh analysis, he’s taking a hands-off approach to the issue as lawmakers try to hash out a final deal.

“Let’s be candid, the ball’s in their court,” Patrick said. “I’ve already expressed myself, and the Legislature is working now on their own approach.”