Meetings & Information




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






Showing posts with label Senator Richard Ross [R-Wrentham]. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Senator Richard Ross [R-Wrentham]. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Don't believe the Propaganda!

REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL is the only sensible solution to protect Massachusetts communities!

Click on the link, get the FACTS, join with your friends and neighbors!







Why A Repealed Casino Law Wouldn't Affect The Mass. Budget Much

By Asma Khalid July 1, 2014
 

BOSTON — In recent days, there’s been some grumbling about a state budget that relies, in part, on gaming revenue that might disappear if voters repeal the casino law this November.
So we wanted to parse the numbers and offer an explanation.
On Monday, the last day of the fiscal year, state lawmakers agreed on a $36.5 billion budget. Out of that sum, $73 million is set to come from casino licensing and slot parlor revenue.
Before the vote Monday, Republican state Sen. Richard Ross cautioned his colleagues.
“I am concerned about the sustainability of this particular budget from the viewpoint that we do predicate it on certain anticipated revenue that we hope comes from something that could be the victim of a citizen petition,” he said. “I do worry that so much of our budget is relying on gambling revenues.”
Anti-casino activists also sent a warning about “phantom revenue,” given that voters could repeal the casino law through a ballot referendum.
But, in some ways, the issue isn't about dollars and cents; it’s more about the politics of gaming.
On Monday, John Ribeiro, chairman of the group Repeal the Casino Deal, said in a statement: “You'd think legislative leaders would have more smarts than to balance the state budget on money they know full well might not exist in a few months.”
But budget experts say the budget routinely relies on anticipated revenue.
Andrew Bagley, director of research and public affairs at the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said the included gaming money is “minimal,” and will have virtually no impact on the budget.
The casino revenue — that $73 million — is only 0.2 percent of the total budget.
“It’s perfectly manageable should those revenues not be available,” Bagley said. “It’s not going to be a problem to balance the [2015 fiscal year budget].”
Noah Berger, president of the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, agrees. He said there are plenty of unpredictable risks in calculating a budget. The biggest one being tax revenue.
“You build the budget based on assumptions about economic growth and a number of other factors that affect tax revenue,” he said. “And, if the tax revenue numbers are off by 1 percent in either direction, that’s a significantly larger swing than the casino revenue money.”
Both Bagley and Berger agree $73 million in a $36.5 billion budget is tiny. And if voters repeal the casino law this November, they say the effect would depend on what’s happening in the overall economy at that moment. The state could dip into the rainy day fund to cover the gaps left from the $73 million shortfall. But, then again, revenue could be greater than expected, so maybe there will be no shortfall at all. It’s all a bit of a guessing game, and lawmakers regularly tweak the budget throughout the year depending on revenue growth.
What’s unique in this $73 million instance is that the voters, not the lawmakers, hold the purse strings.

 
 

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Democrats will pay for casino hypocrisy....??? Let's not pretend!

Republican Senator Scott Brown returned from Washington to rally for his best BUD, Sticky Fingers Piontkowski....do you hear anyone...Republican or Democrat calling for an investigation? Where are Ross and Winslow?

Where is the Massachusetts Attorney General?

AG Martha 'Always Running for Higher Office' Coakley remained silent on the ILLEGAL PLAINRIDGE RAFFLE, conducted for MANY years. [Oddly enough, Martha has Doug Rubin at her side, just as he guiding Governor Slot Barns.]

Grossman never met an effort to suck discretionary income from the poor he didn't relish.....INTERNET here we come!

Republican Charlie Baker lacked the backbone to oppose Predatory Gambling last time around....

Oh! Sure! Stick your finger in the wind to see which way the wind is blowing, Charlie!

When did you ever hear Republicans oppose the GAMBLING LEGISLATION?

You DID NOT!

The unions abandoned their members by blindly supporting this Folly of Low Wage Jobs, refusing to ask questions.






This is your Epiphany!

Support candidates that support YOU!

There were heroes on Beacon Hill who were penalized for their stance.
They lost $$$, committee leadership positions, office space and staff.

It's time to support the HEROES who spoke out for the BEST!

And replace the rest.

Between the Lines: Our NIMBY Governor

Democrats will pay for casino hypocrisy.


Tuesday, November 19, 2013


Together we can!
 
That’s what Deval Patrick told us in his magical first campaign to become governor of Massachusetts.
 
Now, a lame duck with a year left in office, the governor is a bit more qualified in his rallying cry. Today it’s more like, “Together we can... just not in my backyard.”
 
Appearing last week on an “Ask the Governor” segment on WGBH radio in Boston, Patrick fielded a question from a listener from Palmer who asked if the governor would support putting a casino in Richmond, the Berkshire hamlet where Deval and his family own a lavish home. Patrick’s answer showed that, even in his waning days, he remains smug, tone deaf and utterly incapable of making the case for casinos.
 
“I can’t speak for my neighbors in Richmond [but] I would vote against it, personally. And the [expanded gaming] law that was enacted by the Legislature—in a democratic process—provides that local residents get a say in whether they want a facility in their community,” he said. The italics are mine, but the smugness is Patrick’s.
 
In the wake of voters in Palmer and Revere rejecting casino proposals on Nov. 5, joining voters in West Springfield who rejected a proposal earlier this year, the governor and leaders in the Legislature who helped usher in the 2011 expanded gaming law now find themselves at apparent odds with a waking giant. As each day brings another reason to be wary of Patrick’s casino gambit—whether overall, because it’s crappy economic development policy, or in specific cases, as the gaming commission raises questions about the propriety of some of the bidding companies—the electorate seems to be stirring against casinos.
 
Leave it to a pol like Patrick to show, now, some ambivalence toward casinos (at least the idea of one in his neighborhood), as if he’s been with the voters all along. Such ambivalence should have guided the governor away from his intellectually indefensible casino strategy in the first place. Now he spins the rejection of casinos on Election Day as proof that his beloved “democratic process” is working as it should.
 
“In terms of whether everybody should get to vote on the question [of casinos], like I said, we have a democratic process in which the Legislature is supposed to take up those kinds of issues on the behalf of the rest of us, and there were robust debates over a couple of years’ time,” Patrick went on to tell the listener from Palmer. “I think I’m right that there’s a referendum...”
 
Awash in money from casino lobbyists, Patrick and allied Democrats brought gaming back from the dead, after it had been wisely rejected for years by voters and lawmakers. I hope they pay now for their mistake.
Patrick is indeed "smug" and "tone deaf" and , furthermore, he has a strange set of priorities. He recently visited Monson to view a repaired church steeple. Meanwhile, we're still waiting for full broadband access here in Huntington as well as in other Hilltowns. Patrick and our state and local politicians have been promising full broadband coverage for years, much money has been passed around to various groups, yet there's still no universal broadband. New church steeple; no full broadband coverage. What's more important to Gov. Patrick and the economic development of Western Massachusetts? Talk about "crappy economic development policy"!
Posted by Roger Kiraly on 11.20.13
 
 
 

Monday, August 12, 2013

Defining Plainville's Incompetence

Plainville officials silenced questions, refused to consider public comments, ignored the evidence and even now, have failed to ask appropriate questions.....and there are MANY!  



Plainville willingly got in bed with a CROOK, nothing more than a SLICK CON MAN [much as Middleboro got in bed with a CONVICTED RAPIST].



Plainville officials IGNORED AND DEFENDED an ILLEGAL RAFFLE! and much else.



The only place the Horse Poop is flying is Plainville's Town Hall!



Joe Fernandes will be retired on an 80% TAXPAYER FUNDED RETIREMENT when the Tsunami of his BAD decisions hits!




Driving 'irony' in Plainville
Hailed as savior of harness racing, Piontkowski may have killed it

Plainridge Plans 082311 GN Former Plainridge Racecourse President Gary Piontkowski discusses plans related to the track in August 2011.

Posted: Monday, August 12, 2013

Driving 'irony' in Plainville

BY JIM HAND SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
The Sun Chronicle
PLAINVILLE - Just a few months ago, horsemen were praising Gary Piontkowski as the savior of harness racing in Massachusetts.

Piontkowski was the driving force behind efforts to build Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville 15 years ago and bring back harness racing after the state's only track closed in Foxboro.

More recently, he was spearheading the campaign to win a state license to add slot machines to Plainridge so the track could win the added revenue needed to keep racing viable.

"First, there would be no racetrack in Massachusetts if not for the efforts of Mr. Piontkowski," one supporter, Peter Richardson Blood, said on Facebook.

But, from social media to the paddocks of his former track, Piontkowski's name has been sullied by the revelation that he was taking money from the track for years.

A state Gaming Commission uncovered the practice and, as a result, the commission disqualified Plainridge from competition for the slot machine license.

The commission said it was also unhappy investors did not try to get the $1.4 million back, and instead bought out Piontkowski's share of the track for $1.8 million and agreed to pay him $180,000 a year for two years.

Piontkowski did not return phone calls or answer the door at his Rhode Island home, so he could not be reached for comment.

But, the former savior is now being viewed as the killer of harness racing.

"Gary single-handedly nailed the coffin shut on Massachusetts racing," critic Jaymes McAssey said on a Facebook page dedicated to the racing community.

Those who had public dealings with Piontkowski, but did not know the inner workings of Plainridge, say they are stunned by the turn of events.

"I think he is the guy who saved racing, and I think it is somewhat ironic the tables have turned and he is the guy who might have destroyed it," said state Sen. Richard Ross, R-Wrentham.

Ross has been supportive of the track over the years because so many workers, horsemen and farms derived their incomes from it.

He said he never imagined there was something financially wrong at the track, but quickly added he does not know what standard business practices are in the gambling industry.

The Gaming Commission obviously believed Piontkowski's practice of taking up to $1.4 million from the track's "money room" was beyond the pale.

It was critical of Piontkowski and the track owners, and found Plainridge unsuitable for a gaming license.

But, even in the best of times, Piontkowski and the track were controversial.

Piontkowski was the former manager of another track that used to operate in Foxboro. Always politically well connected, he also served for a time as chairman of the state Racing Commission.

The man who replaced him as chairman, Robert Hutchinson, voted against Plainridge getting a state license for racing in 1998. He noted, among other things, that all of its investors had not been vetted by state police at the time of the vote.

He was overruled by two other commissioners.

State police alleged that the two commissioners had been holding improper communications with the administration of then Gov. Paul Cellucci in "an extensive web of behind the scenes connections between the racetrack backers and the Cellucci administration," according to press reports at the time.

But, that was just the beginning of the controversies.
 
Piontkowski and partner Lou Giuliano, who financed the track project, had a falling out and ended up in a legal battle. Giuliano even claimed his signature had been forged on some documents.

Piontkowski got control of the track and Giuliano tried to open a competing operation in Foxboro, but never got the project going.

In 2004, state police were again at odds with Piontkowski, accusing him of taking illegal telephone bets. At the time, betting over the phone in Massachusetts was not allowed. It is now.

Piontkowski countered that the state police were corrupt and were retaliating against him for complaints he had filed against them.

The racing commission dropped the matter.

Even when it appeared Piontkowski and the track were trying to do something good, it got caught up in controversy.

Resident Mary-Ann Greanier filed a complaint with the state Attorney General's Office about a charity raffle the track had conducted. The Attorney General's Office closed the case after the track agreed not to conduct the raffle in the future.

One of the strangest episodes at Plainridge came in 2002, when a man posing as a Brinks security guard stole more than $100,000 from the track.

The man timed the crime when the sun was shining into security cameras.

The suspect police later said committed the crime was found shot to death in Rhode Island and the case was never solved.

Last year, during the quest for the slot machine license, Piontkowski stirred up more controversy when he sued a gambling opponent because someone had posted derogatory comments about the track on the man's website. [SLAPP suit: Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation - intended to BULLY and INTIMIDATE!]

The suit was dismissed and the track was ordered to pay legal fees.

Yet, until recently, Piontkowski was always held in high regard by Plainville town officials.




They said Piontkowski was cooperative, civic minded, supportive of local charities and youth sports clubs, and was running an outfit that provided jobs and much-needed tax revenue to the town.

Former Police Chief Ned Merrick, whose wife worked at the track, said there was never any trouble at Plainridge while he was chief.

So, officials said they were blindsided when Piontkowski resigned last April and more recently when the investigative report came out detailing his practice of taking money from the track.

They were hoping Plainridge would get the slots license because it had promised to pay the town $1.5 million a year in property taxes, along with $2.7 million in fees.

Slot machines were also supposed to generate 400 new jobs.

Town Administrator Joseph Fernandes said he is troubled by several aspects of the Piontkowski case, but perhaps what bothers him the most is that investors and Piontkowski lied when they said he was retiring for health reasons.


Gee, Joe, Do you think that constitutes 'NEGOTIATING IN BAD FAITH'?

And yet you continue to negotiate under the circumstances?

Do you think in Plainville's BEST INTERESTS, maybe the Town should sue Plainridge?

Joe, Didn't you think it was puzzling that those HEALTH REASONS necessitated a financial buyout?

It's difficult to know if we can blame incompetence or stupidity!

The windfall town officials were hoping for is lost, and now they are worried the track will close, people will lose their jobs, farms that support horse racing will be sold and Plainville will lose the $279,000 a year the track is currently paying in taxes.

"I think it is a shame one person could ruin it for all those people," Town Assessor Mary Jo LaFreniere said.


http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/driving-irony-in-plainville/article_076d86f6-173b-593f-a513-8c6a09a7fb87.html