Meetings & Information




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






Showing posts with label Suffolk Downs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Suffolk Downs. Show all posts

Thursday, July 6, 2017

Casino tax winds up with state’s well-heeled horse owners





The only source for this fund at this time is the Plainridge Slot Barn.

Casino tax winds up with state’s well-heeled horse owners

Jack EncarnacaoMatt Stout Thursday, July 06, 2017



Credit: John Wilcox

COMPETING INTERESTS: Horses leave the gate at Suffolk Downs, above, which has received millions in casino taxes that critics would like to spend elsewhere.

Taxpayers have been fattening the winning purses of wealthy horse owners at Suffolk Downs the past two years thanks to the Bay State’s horse racing fund, which is fueling their six-figure payouts at a time critics are howling for the money to go to better priorities for the budget-strapped state government.

The cumulative winnings, detailed in a Herald analysis of payouts from the East Boston track, have been financed entirely by the $35 million in tax dollars the Race Horse Development Fund has taken in since 2015, when the state’s first slots parlor opened.

The fund was meant to bolster the purses — the winnings paid out to horse owners — that struggling Massachusetts tracks can offer to attract top thoroughbreds. The fund is made up mostly of taxes on casino revenues, and is parceled out to tracks by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission.

The fund has become a popular target for lawmakers facing a potential $1 billion budget shortfall, including a Senate proposal to tap it for $13 million for “pressing environmental, conservation and recreation needs.”

The well-heeled owners of winning horses at Suffolk Downs since 2015 include:

• Patricia Moseley ($176,350 in winnings), the widow of former Suffolk Downs owner James
B. Moseley and daughter of Crocker Snow, who founded one of Boston’s first commercial airlines. She lives on the family estate in Hamilton;

• Teresa Horky ($160,900), the CEO of Pegasus Solutions, a successful tax preparation, health care consulting and financial consulting firm she founded; and

• Joseph DiRico ($157,950), a VP at his family’s third-generation company, Hub Folding Box in Mansfield. His late father, Alfred, also took home $45,000 in purse winnings from Suffolk Downs in 2015.

Greg Sullivan, a former state inspector general now with the Pioneer Institute, said it “makes no sense” for casino taxes to end up in wealthy horse owners’ pockets, especially after Suffolk Downs lost a bid to build its own casino and in May, cashed in on the $155 million sale of the property.

“Now here we are, Suffolk Downs is being sold, and they’re sitting on this pile of money, which is winding up in the pockets of millionaires at a time when Massachusetts is essentially broke,” Sullivan said.

“This should be terminated immediately, and those funds should be used for important purposes in Massachusetts.”

State Rep. Brad Jones, who has proposed diverting a portion of the fund to community preservation, said the payouts illustrate how the racing industry plays to wealthier residents.
“Generally speaking, it’s an older clientele and a more affluent clientele,” Jones, the House minority leader, said of horse racing. “That’s a very finite universe. And I think it does raise the question, is that the best place to put these resources from gaming?”

Where were you when GAMBLING LEGISLATION was proposed? Silent? 

The owners defended the six-figure hauls, arguing the data don’t show how much they are investing to support local horse farms and related trades with the winnings.

Paul Umbrello, executive director for the New England Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association, said it could often take $35,000 to $50,000 to breed and train just a single horse.

“They’re not going to put (purse winnings) in their pocket and buy a car — they’re going to turn it back into whatever it takes to raise these horses, which is considerable,” Moseley told the Herald. “I don’t know what form racing’s going to take, if any, but it won’t take any if they don’t have some of this support.”

Horky argued that in her 20-plus years in the industry, she’s lost money the vast majority of the time, adding that she’s “paid more to Massachusetts farms than I won.”

“You put it all back into that industry in hopes to keep it open and running, and having some space for children to see there’s something with four legs besides a dog,” she said.

Commission spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll said tracking who ends up winning money from the purse fund “suggests a misunderstanding of its purpose and operation.” She said it helps support an entire network of breeders, trainers, veterinarians and jockeys.

Since 2015, the fund has taken in $35.4 million and paid out $22.4 million, 80 percent of which is earmarked for purses. Prior to the that, when Suffolk Downs ran scores of races each year, purses were funded by whatever was left of the money wagered — dubbed the “handle” — after taxes were taken out and the track took its cut.

Suffolk Downs is hosting six days of racing this summer, with the first scheduled for Saturday and, again, the fund supporting all the purses.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2017/07/casino_tax_winds_up_with_state_s_well_heeled_horse_owners


Wednesday, October 19, 2016

CONGRATULATIONS! REVERE SAYS NO DICE ON SLOT BARN




REVERE SAYS NO DICE ON SLOTS

October 19, 2016
Debbie P. DiGiulio, administrative assistant in the Mayor’s office, shows Revere Mayor Brian M. Arrigo the voting results regarding slot machines on Tuesday. (Photo by Paula Muller)
By Thomas Grillo

REVERE — Voters overwhelmingly rejected a slots parlor near the shuttered Suffolk Downs race track.
In a lopsided 65 to 35 percent vote Tuesday, the city joined Mayor Brian Arrigo and the Beacon Hill delegation in saying no to what opponents called the wrong kind of economic development for the city.
“Obviously tonight, the people of Revere sent a resounding message that no amount of dark money and no amount of false advertising would persuade them to be for a bad idea,” said Arrigo. “Having a coalition of state and local leaders who spoke with the same voice to say this isn’t about being pro- or anti-gaming, this is about being for good ideas and against bad ideas and this is a bad idea.”
Voters in every one of the city’s 21 precincts rejected Tuesday’s non-binding initiative petition that sought approval for any future slot parlor license awarded in Revere to be located on a site that fronts Revere Beach Parkway, Winthrop Parkway and Pratt Court.
The vote delivers a defeat to investor Eugene McCain, who has an option to buy the parcels for more than $6.5 million. He moved to the city to advance his proposal and vowed the project would generate more than $80 million in new revenues for the state annually, $12 million to support horse racing, $5 million for Revere and 500 new jobs.
McCain did not respond to a request for comment.
In an interview last week with the Item, McCain, the managing director of Alliante Capital, was confident that voters want a slots parlor. He was betting on a complicated process that involves local approval for the Revere site and a statewide thumbs-up for an additional slots parlor on the November ballot.
Even if voters had approved the plan in Revere, it faced an uncertain future at the polls next month.
The statewide vote on Nov. 8, Question 1 on the ballot, would allow for a slots parlor at a location at least four acres in size and within 1,500 feet of a race track. The proposal is for a gaming establishment with no table games and no more than 1,250 slot machines.
In addition, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission would have to sign off on the second slots parlor. Observers say such an outcome seems doubtful since it would upend rules of two casinos and one slots parlor that were agreed upon prior to the start of issuing licenses.

The Gaming Commission awarded a resort casino license for the $2 billion Wynn Boston Harbor project in Everett, the $950 million MGM in Springfield and the $250 million Plainridge Park Casino, a slots parlor in Plainville.
Robert Selevitch, a West Revere resident who campaigned against the proposal, was thrilled at the vote.
“The people of Revere saw this proposal as something less than the last one that was here for a full destination resort casino by a very reputable casino operator in Mohegan Sun, this proposal was a slot parlor by group of people who would not identify themselves and had a very shady financial background,” he said. “They presented an option that the people of Revere didn’t see as beneficial.”

Thomas Grillo can be reached at tgrillo@itemlive.com.



Commission: Raynham Park simulcast at risk if Suffolk Downs fees remain unpaid




Commission: Raynham Park simulcast at risk if Suffolk Downs fees remain unpaid





The Massachusetts Gaming Commission voted last week to require Raynham Park, which belongs to Brockton Fairgrounds owner George Carney, to pay around $300,000 within 30 days or face the suspension or revocation of its license that allows for simulcast race betting.

RAYNHAM – Raynham Park, a former dog track that continues to operate as a racing simulcast center, is being ordered to fork over more than $300,000 in fees, which Suffolk Downs has long claimed it is owed as part of an off-track betting arrangement that was established by state law.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission voted 3-2 last week to require Raynham Park, which belongs to Brockton Fairgrounds owner George Carney, to pay the money within 30 days or face the suspension or revocation of its license that allows for simulcast race betting. The two dissenting commissioners said they agreed with a motion to enforce the payment, but wanted to give Raynham Park more time.
Simulcast betting has been the main attraction at Raynham Park, located on Route 138 near the border with Easton, since greyhound racing was banned throughout the state following a ballot referendum that was held in 2008 and enacted in 2010.
The five-member commission was unanimous that it had the authority to make a determination that Raynham Park must pay the 3 percent of its intrastate simulcast revenues to Suffolk Downs for the the time period in question, which was from October 2014 and June 2015. After that time span, the state legislature suspended the fee obligation following the opening of the Plainridge Park Casino.
Lawyers for Raynham Park argued that that Suffolk Downs was not an active horse racing licensee during that period of time, and that the issue should be resolved in court, instead of by the state commission. Patrick Dinardo, representing Raynham Park, said that, in its petition to the state gaming commission, Suffolk Downs never mentioned that 90 percent of those fees would go to the New England Horsemen’s Association, which has a purse agreement with the Boston facility.
“Suffolk Downs is trying to collect these premiums for its benefit, when the statute says that these premiums are supposed to be paid into purses,” Dinardo told the commission during a meeting held in Boston on Thursday. “The point of the premiums was to augment the purses. If you’re not having a racing operation, then there is no purses. From the period in question, October 2014 through June 2015, there were no races at Suffolk Downs, and therefore no purses. ... The New England Horsemen is the real party of interest here.”
Dinardo said if the matter is settled in court, it would be better because all of the facts about the simulcast arrangement would come out through the evidence discovery process.
“If Suffolk Downs wants to bring an action in Superior Court for declaratory relief, and they think they have an entitlement to this premium, we can address that issue in the court, where it's a question of interpreting the statutory scheme,” Dinardo said.
The lawyers for Raynham Park also argued that the adjudicatory guidelines for the Massachusetts Gaming Commission do not contemplate such an enforcement action by the commission.
“Ultimately, it will end up in Superior Court, one way or the other,” Dinardo said.
Catherine Blue, general counsel for the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, said that the issue is within the commission’s jurisdiction under the state’s horse racing law, and that the commission could hold a hearing to suspend or revoke Raynham Park’s license if it doesn’t pay the bill.
Reached on Tuesday afternoon, Carney, the owner of Raynham Park, said that Suffolk Downs didn’t apply for a racing license in 2014, and for that reason he believes it isn’t entitled to the simulcast premiums.
“I didn't feel we owed them money,” Carney said. “That's my position.”
Carney said that he and his lawyers are now still deciding whether to take the matter to court themselves.
Commissioner Enrique Zuniga said that he doesn’t buy Raynham Park’s argument.
“The heart of the matter is whether the obligation was there,” Zuniga said. “That's the part I'm not persuaded at all on, the claims from Raynham.”
The following is a video of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission meeting on October 13. The discussion on the Raynhan Park simulcast fees begins at 1:24:30.






http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/20161018/commission-raynham-park-simulcast-at-risk-if-suffolk-downs-fees-remain-unpaid


Tuesday, October 18, 2016

MASACHUSETTS BALLOT QUESTION 1: Mass. voters asked to allow second slots BARN license


With Casino Vultures....only the names change! 








Mass. voters asked to allow second slots license









Sunday, October 2, 2016

Massachusetts Ballot Question !: Slot BARN in Revere denounced by mayor



The Gambling Vultures promise to pave the streets with GOLD, solve ALL fiscal problems...when they fail to deliver....? There are no consequences. 

Atlantic City crime and poverty.....and lawmakers still haven't figured it out.....




Massachusetts Voters rallied around the BOGUS promises that were easily discredited......Unions accepted the False promises.....Massachusetts voters fell for it.....











Slot  BARN in Revere denounced by mayor

Thursday, June 30, 2016

Court says Suffolk Downs slots parlor question properly certified for 2016 ballot





SJC clears slots parlor question for November ballot

A 'yes' vote could give Plainridge competition
Posted: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 7:02 pm | Updated: 2:06 pm, Wed Jun 29, 2016.
PLAINVILLE - Voters will get to decide if Plainridge Park Casino will have competition from another slots parlor after a decision by the state Supreme Judicial Court.
The court ruled that an attempt to pass a refendum question allowing for a second slots parlor can go forward to the November election.
The unanimous decision stated that petitioners had met the requirements for getting the question on the ballot. It did not address the merits of the proposed slots parlor, itself.
A reclusive businessman named Eugene McCain is behind the effort, although he has said little about it.
His question asks voters to approve a second slots parlor to be located within 1,500 feet of a horse track.
The harness track at Plainridge already has slot machines. The only other track is Suffolk Downs in Boston, but it has closed down for all but six days a year.
The ballot question would amend a 2011 state law that allows for three resort casinos and one slot parlor in Massachusetts.


Court says Suffolk Downs slots parlor question properly certified for 2016 ballot



By Michael P. Norton / STATE HOUSE NEW SERVICE

Posted Jun. 28, 2016 at 3:02 PM 


A ballot question authorizing a slots parlor with up to 1,250 machines at the former Suffolk Downs horse racing track was properly certified for this November's ballot, according to the Supreme Judicial Court, which on Tuesday rejected the claims of plaintiffs who sought to have the question disqualified.
Ruling in Bogertman v. Attorney General, the high court rejected the assertions of 10 Suffolk County residents, including gambling opponents, that the initiative petition should be ruled ineligible for the ballot under the constitution's "local matters exclusion."
The court concluded that the slots parlor license proposed in the ballot question "could potentially be awarded to a site in many localities, even if it were most likely that it would be awarded to a site near Suffolk Downs," which is on the East Boston-Revere border.
The local matter exclusion is designed to ensure that only matters of statewide concern are put before voters statewide. The court noted that the petition's subject matter - gaming - is regulated by the state and "is plainly an issue of Statewide concern," with the facility's patrons and workers expected to come from outside the area, taxes flowing to the state, and its adverse consequences expected to spill over across municipal borders.
"These factors support submission of the petition to the entire Massachusetts electorate," the court concluded in an opinion written by Chief Justice Ralph Gants.
If approved, the question could lead to a second slots parlor.
After securing a slots license, Plainridge Park Casino in Plainville was the first expanded gambling facility to open under a 2011 law that authorized a single slot parlor and three resort casinos. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has issued licenses for casinos to be located in Everett and Springfield. The Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe is forging ahead with plans to build a tribal casino in Taunton.
The court also rejected the claim that the question should not have been certified because it is "substantially the same" as a matter that appeared on the ballot in either of the two preceding biennial state elections. The plaintiffs argued Question 3 in 2014, which called for a ban on casinos and slot parlors, was substantially the same as the proposed 2016 ballot question. Voters rejected the 2014 question.
Contrasting the casino ban question and this year's ballot question, Gants wrote that the pending proposal "merely seeks to make one incremental change in the licensing scheme for slots parlors by authorizing the commission to award a second license."
Attorney Matthew Cameron represented the plaintiffs and Jeffrey King and Hayley Trahan-Liptak submitted a brief on behalf of Eugene McCain, a Revere resident who is pushing the ballot question.
McCain is the chairman of the Horse Racing Jobs and Education Committee, a ballot committee that lists its mailing address as K&L Gates, a global law firm with a Boston office at State Street Financial Center, One Lincoln Street in Boston.

In a May 1 campaign finance report, the committee listed $284,000 in receipts and an equal amount in expenditures. The receipts all came from Capital Productions LLC based in Wilmington, Delaware. All of the expenditures were for signature gathering and the payments were made to J.E.F. Associates of West Springfield.
McCain filed the carefully worded initiative petition authorizing, but not requiring, the gaming commission to award one additional category 2 slots parlor license for a location that "shall be at least 4 acres large, and shall be adjacent to, and within 1500 feet of, a race track, including the track, grounds, paddocks, barns, auditorium, amphitheatre and/or bleachers, if any, where a horse racing meeting may physically be held, which race track shall have hosted a horse racing meeting, provided that said location is not separated from said race track by a highway railway."
The court wrote that the requirements "do not refer to any particular geographical location, and the plaintiffs have not demonstrated why a developer could not create a new entertainment complex that meets these specifications at any one of many possible locations across the Commonwealth where horse races have been held or could be conducted, and then proceed to apply for the new slots parlor license."
In their opinion, the court notes that counsel for the question's proponents had asserted in a memo that the siting criteria in the question would apply to at least 10 municipalities in Massachusetts that have already hosted horse racing meetings.
While the plaintiffs alleged that McCain has a "property interest" in the land near Suffolk Downs where the slots facility could be built, the court ruled those assertions "are not appropriate for judicial notice, and, even if they were, they would not suffice to show that the proposed law is limited to local matters."
King, who represents McCain, was unable to say Tuesday whether the ballot campaign had gathered sufficient signatures needed to clear an early July hurdle to secure ballot access in November. The committee by next Wednesday must submit at least 10,792 locally certified voter signatures to stay on track for the ballot. A spokesman for Secretary of State William Galvin told the News Service Tuesday that the campaign had so far turned in "some" of its signatures.
Saying it is focused on laws, not motives, the court acknowledged the interests that drive proponents and opponents of ballot questions "may often involve self-interest rather than the public interest," adding that "it may well be true that this petition was motivated by one person's desire to profit from the Commonwealth's developing gaming industry, based on his ownership interest in a particular property."

In court briefs, McCain's attorneys wrote that he "understands that an additional successful slot parlor and commercial development could help invigorate a neighboring race track and the local economy, providing jobs at race tracks and horse breeding farms across the state, providing tax resources for education and other community services, while generally bringing in additional economic revenue to the Commonwealth." His attorneys said McCain has "investigated and pursued the acquisition of properties throughout Massachusetts, including Revere" with the hope of meeting the conditions necessary to qualify for the slots license authorized by the ballot question.
In addition to Suffolk Downs, Plainridge Racecourse and the Brockton Fairgrounds, horse racing meetings have been held over the years in Massachusetts at Berkshire Downs in Hancock, Foxboro Raceway, the Franklin Fair, the Great Barrington Fair, the Marshfield Fair, the Northampton Fair, the Weymouth Fair, and the Middleborough Agricultural Fair, according to a court brief filed by McCain's attorneys. The site of the Franklin Fair is now a shopping plaza and there's a housing development at the location of the Weymouth Fair.


http://reading.wickedlocal.com/news/20160628/court-says-suffolk-downs-slots-parlor-question-properly-certified-for-2016-ballot