Kraft Group Pays $1 Million For $400,000 Walpole Property

Kraft Group Pays $1 Million For $400,000 Walpole Property Near Gillette Stadium

May 17, 2012

 

FOXBORO (CBS) – A recent purchase by the Kraft Group in Foxboro is raising some eyebrows in the neighboring town of Walpole.

The sale was completed just before residents of Foxboro voted in a town election that showed they were not in favor a proposed destination casino on land across from Gillette Stadium.

The property sits on a private way in Walpole and abuts the parking lot where that casino would have been placed. That private way connects to a public road in Walpole.

The property is assessed at just over $400,000, but the Kraft Group paid nearly $1.2 million for it.
The Kraft Group had no comment when asked about the sale Wednesday.

Officials in Walpole told WBZ-TV they plan to look into the sale and try to determine what the Kraft Group has planned for the property.

 

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/05/17/kraft-group-pays-1-million-for-400000-walpole-property-near-gillette-stadium/

Preserving the Character of Foxboro

Our Video: Preserving the Character of Foxboro In this compelling video, leaders in the Connecticut communities near Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun tell how their towns have been impacted by the casinos: from increased traffic (especially on side roads), crime, drunk driving, to negative impacts on businesses and schools, property values and sadly the loss of a small town feel. Residents and leaders in Foxboro also share their concerns around mitigation, loss of liquor control, lack of water resources and much more.

Massachusetts' Casino Plans Have Some Locals Unhappy

Massachusetts' Casino Plans Have Some Locals Unhappy
Posted: 04/22/2012

WALPOLE, Mass. (AP) — Mike McCarthy's home is about as close to the site of a proposed resort casino in Foxborough as you can possibly get, but as things now stand he'd have little or no say in whether it gets built.

A chain-link fence at the top of a small grassy knoll that separates the edge of McCarthy's property from the large vacant lot behind it also marks the boundaries of two towns. So while the state's new gaming law requires a vote of approval from residents of the town where a casino will be built, McCarthy and his neighbors — Walpole residents — would likely have no vote though they live nearer to the site than anyone in Foxborough.

"We never thought a casino would be in our backyard," said McCarthy, a 36-year-old father of two young children who moved his family to the quiet residential neighborhood two years ago. His and others' lands abut land owned by New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and on which Las Vegas casino magnate Steve Wynn hopes to develop a $1 billion resort.

But the concerns of McCarthy and his neighbors, while unusual, are not unique in Massachusetts. Many people who live near potential casino locations are also demanding a stronger, if not equal voice, in the approval process as those who actually live in the communities where casinos may be built.

Backers of the casino law say it includes plenty of protection for neighboring cities or towns. The law requires developers to negotiate so-called mitigation agreements with surrounding communities. While not specified, such agreements could include money for such things as traffic improvements or additional police.

The law also requires the state's five-member gaming commission to hold a public hearing on casino license applications that may include testimony from residents of neighboring towns.

"Surrounding communities have a fair amount of leverage," said commission chairman Stephen Crosby.

But not enough leverage for some who worry about traffic jams caused by people going to and from casinos in neighboring communities, or a rise in crime or other social ills associated with gambling. They claim such negatives would offset any benefits from mitigation funds or the jobs that a casino might create.

One casino is proposed for the Suffolk Downs horse racing track, which straddles the East Boston neighborhood and the city of Revere. Both would be designated as host communities and residents of each would get a vote before a casino was built.

But nearby Winthrop also deserves a vote, since many of its residents live within a mile of the track and the town's two major traffic arteries both go by Suffolk Downs, said John Ribeiro, a Winthrop resident who heads the anti-casino group Neighbors of Suffolk Downs.

"Traffic is going to be unbearable," he said.

"Property values are going to go down and property taxes are going to up to deal with the problems," he added.

Ribeiro also contends that the law contains no clause that would strip a casino of its license if it fails to abide by its mitigation agreements with surrounding communities.

State Rep. John Rogers, a Democrat who represents Walpole, argued in a recent letter sent to Crosby that the town should have host community status and its residents allowed to vote.

He said the proposed Wynn casino would have to tap into Walpole water and sewer systems and the town would have to provide access for emergency vehicles leaving or entering the site.

"Without Walpole, the casino cannot work," Rogers wrote.

Crosby, who responded prior to the commission's first full formal meetings, promised that the panel would pay serious attention to the issues Rogers raised.

For the Foxborough project, Wynn Resorts said in a statement that it would be inappropriate to start negotiations with any surrounding community because it has yet to gain permission to begin host community talks with Foxborough, where the project has also been the subject of heated debate.

"That said, we have no intention of excluding anyone from learning about our proposal," the company said.

Other potential casino developers around Massachusetts have pledged to be sensitive to the concerns of neighboring communities, including Mohegan Sun, which has proposed a resort casino in Palmer, a town nestled among several largely rural communities in the western part of the state.

"We're aware that we are not just in Palmer," said Paul Brody, vice president of Mohegan Gaming Advisors. "We will be diligent around setting up and being mindful of the needs of the smaller towns outside of Palmer."

[Is it ethical for a Town Councilor to operate in this capacity?]

Officials of more than a dozen communities within a 30-mile radius of the proposed Palmer casino formed a task force to explore potential regional impacts of a casino and pool their influence in future licensing decisions.

Right now, the unpaved, 200-acre lot envisioned as the site of the Foxborough casino is used for overflow parking during Patriots games at nearby Gillette Stadium. It's visible through a thicket of trees about 50 feet from a swing set that McCarthy's children, ages 7 and 4, play on.

McCarthy said he was fully aware when he bought his Walpole home that the lot would eventually be developed, perhaps into an office park or retail complex.

But he said he never envisioned a casino operating 24 hours, seven days a week. Casino gambling was illegal in Massachusetts until the law signed last year.

McCarthy said it was not far-fetched to imagine casino patrons, possibly drunk after hours of gambling, wandering into the woods and on to his property, or using his quiet street as a shortcut to get home.

"Right now it's an extremely kid-friendly neighborhood, a very close-knit neighborhood where kids can ride their bikes and play somewhat freely outside, running from yard to yard, and all that would be taken away," he said.


Associated Press writer Steve LeBlanc in Boston contributed to this report.

Tearing a town assunder

The Town of Foxborough added a prohibition of GAMBLING to their zoning by-laws. In a referendum, residents voted overwhelmingly to oppose a SLOT BARN.

This is a host community that schmoozes with a football stadium and has no idea what the costs and impacts are, yet has fiscal problems which might be caused by those costs.

While some have consumed the KoolAid and welcomed the low wage jobs a Slot Barn offers, Foxborough represents the latest town to be divided in what promises to be contentious wherever by 'developers' who have no personal connections to their destruction.


FOXBOROUGH
High stakes for this election
Casino a big issue in selectmen’s race
By Michele Morgan Bolton

Officially, it’s the election of two Foxborough selectmen. But the outcome is being watched from Boston to Las Vegas.

That’s because Foxborough’s Board of Selectmen is gatekeeper for a Town Meeting vote on whether to allow gambling in Foxborough, and in light of the narrow 3-to-2 vote on Dec. 27 that stalled the $1 billion casino proposal of Las Vegas mogul Steve Wynn, the May 7 election could easily swing the balance in the opposite direction.

Selectmen’s races in small towns usually don’t generate much attention, said Thomas Whalen, an associate professor of social science at Boston University, but this year in Foxborough will be “radically’’ different.

“There’s nothing like a controversial issue such as casino gambling to galvanize grass-roots political efforts on both sides,’’ Whalen said. “In fact, for this small area of the state, this might rival the much anticipated Scott Brown/Elizabeth Warren race for the US Senate.’’

Noting former House speaker Thomas P. O’Neill’s comment that “all politics is local,’’ Whalen said: “The moral of the story is that every vote counts, especially with so much at stake in terms of the future of Foxborough.’’

For the May 7 election, completed nomination papers with at least 50 certified signatures are due in the town clerk’s office by March 19. Already, candidates with a range of views on the subject have lined up to run.

Incumbent Selectwoman Lorraine Brue, who voted on Dec. 27 not to enter negotiations with Wynn, and board chairman Larry Harrington, who voted in favor of hearing more about the proposal, will seek reelection against four challengers.

Former selectman Paul Mortenson and former state representative Virginia Coppola, who oppose the casino proposal, are in the race, as is newcomer Richard Letson, who says he is undecided on the casino plan.

Also in the running is 14-year School Committee member Martha Slattery, who has said she wants to see details of the casino proposal. She has also acknowledged that until a specific proposal comes forward, there really is no casino issue.

This reminds me:




What has emerged about the proposal so far is that Wynn wants to build a resort hotel complex on land across from Gillette Stadium on Route 1. He has pledged to accommodate Foxborough’s rural, small-town character by down-scaling the design and tailoring it to the property, which he would lease from New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft.

The land is currently used for stadium parking.

Supporters say they welcome the jobs and business development promised by a casino and hotel complex, while opponents say they fear round-the-clock traffic and increased crime, among other concerns.

Immediately after the idea of a casino surfaced in early December, a public relations battle erupted, with debate sometimes turning ugly at public meetings where selectmen drew boos and taunts, and, in some cases, argued loudly with residents.

The debate has simmered down in recent weeks, and attention has shifted to the town election.

In their campaigning, the candidates have pointed out that a selectman’s job involves tending to all the town’s issues, not just its most contentious one. But clearly, they are going to play a pivotal role in the latter. For the casino to become a reality, Foxborough would have to change current zoning, which bans gambling; agree to enter into a contract with Wynn; then hold a series of townwide votes. That won’t happen without the support of selectmen.

And no matter who wins the election, recent history has shown that views can change. A unanimous September vote, for example, to reject zoning changes to allow gaming was upended a week later, when Harrington apologized publicly for acting hastily and said the board should have allowed the town to decide.

At the time, Selectwoman Lynda Walsh and Selectman Mark Sullivan agreed with Harrington, while Brue and Selectman James DeVellis remained opposed.

Then, in December, Sullivan switched to the anti-casino side, creating the majority that rebuffed the Kraft-Wynn team.

In this election, Members of No Foxborough Casino, a grass-roots opposition group, will support candidates who reflect their belief that a casino is not right for the town, said spokeswoman Holly Steel.

“We have to trust that the elected leaders are looking out for our best interests,’’ said Steel. That means adhering to town bylaws voted into law by residents at Town Meeting to outlaw gaming, she said.

“We also feel candidates on both sides of the issue have to be transparent,’’ Steel said. “If you are for it, tell voters. If you oppose it, be clear. Then people in Foxborough can make the right decision.’’

On the other side, at least 80 tradesmen in Norwood-based Carpenters Local 535 are unemployed and in danger of losing their homes, said union business manager Joe Broderick, a Foxborough native. [There is no guarantee that ANY jobs will be union jobs. The Gambling Industry has a lengthy history of being anti-union, a fact that escapes many.]

“I don’t understand the opposition to the casino,’’ Broderick said. “How can you say no to something you haven’t seen?’’

In the end, people will vote for whom they want in this year’s election, Broderick said, but he is encouraging voters to seek out candidates who have an open mind.

“And, if I was a selectman, I would look for the best mitigation expert there is and get every penny I could,’’ he said of any deal the Wynn team would negotiate with the town. “Here, you practically have a goose laying a golden egg.’’

Walpole wants a say on gambling
Michele Morgan Bolton

State Representative John Rogers has asked the chairman of the new Massachusetts Gaming Commission to give Walpole a voice in the Foxborough casino debate, asserting the town has as much at stake, if not more, than its neighbor to the east.

Rogers, a Norwood Democrat whose district includes Walpole, wrote to Stephen Crosby late last month looking to have the town declared a co-host community so that it will not only be compensated, as the new state casino law allows, but also have a primary seat at the table, and a vote on whether to allow the casino.

Walpole town officials have been vocal in their opposition to the proposal brought by Steve Wynn. The Las Vegas mogul intends to build a $1 billion resort complex across from Gillette Stadium on land he would lease from Robert Kraft, who owns the stadium and the New England Patriots.

The casino would be near the border with Walpole, and in his letter, Rogers said the site directly affects 500 Walpole residences.

He cited the 1999 legislation related to the construction of the Foxborough stadium that named Walpole as an integral player “whose infrastructure enhancements are necessary to promote the public safety and convenience of the Foxborough economic area.’’

Rogers also noted that parking, sewer, and emergency access issues further promote Walpole as an equal player, including the fact that the property’s alternative egress point would force the flow of traffic out onto Summer Street, if needed.

Michael Boynton, Walpole’s town administrator, said Rogers’ efforts are appreciated.

“We should have an equal voice because there is a clear impact on our residents as well,’’ Boynton said. “The Town of Walpole has made its concerns known. Now the next steps are waiting to see what comes out of the development team.’’

Crosby, who was traveling, made no commitments in a statement released through a spokeswoman.

“We are filing whatever correspondence is being sent to the commission so that once the other four gaming commissioners are appointed and the organization is fully formed and is up and running, we can address these matters in an organized and appropriate way,’’ Crosby said.

Track Replacemenet in Walpole

Track Replacement in Walpole MA (6/1/11)

Last week i stopped by Walpole Station to see if i could catch CSX B735. When i drove into the parking lot i realized that the mbta was in the process of replacing the abandoned tracks that run through the parking lot. I took some videos and pics while i was there.

My guess is that they are replacing the tracks in order to provide an easier route for the Patriots train to access the CSX Fram-Sub line later this year. I also think the MBTA is thinking of expanding the Franklin line and adding a branchline to Foxboro MA in the future.

Though my prediction may be wrong... CSX owns trackage rights on that line and even if the MBTA wanted to run trains to Foxboro daily they would have to get permission from CSX and have a schedule that doesn't interfere with CSX locals. I believe there are 4-5 local freights to light power moves a day making it quite complicated for extra traffic especially from MBTA Commuter trains.


Why are those new tracks so rusty?

blood117
I saw in the bulletin that the Lewis Wye (which is what this is) was out of service, but they didn't say why - I'm glad it's a replacement and not a dismantling. FWIW, commuter trains (used to) run on CSX tracks all day long, on the Worcester line, so CSX knows how to deal with MBCR trains and freight trains (though traffic is of course an issue). CSX sold the Worcester tracks to the T, but CSX still dispatches them and they run on CSX rules - that will change sooner or later.


NE pats stadium train with 2 engines must see!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Same Beacon Hill Corruption, Different Faces

On Friday morning (10/21/11) I woke up real early and got to Walpole Station at 6:30am to get a decent parking spot. About five hours later the CSX OCS went through. You will notice that i wasn't the only one taking photos! I chased the CSX OCS from Walpole, to Foxboro. Enjoy the video, and thanks for watching!


A commuter rail line that would cost Massachusetts taxpayers ~ $100 MILLION and have an estimated annual operating loss of ~ $4 MILLION would be required for a Foxborough Slot Barn to be feasible.

Kudos to Rep. John H. Rogers!

And kudos as well to the Walpole paper that publishes anti-gambling information, unlike far too many others in the state that censor.

For the sake of full disclosure, Rep. John H. Rogers voted consistently AGAINST Governor Slot Barn's FOLLY known as Predatory Gambling.

The votes are listed below:

HOUSE

SENATE

Although Governor Slot Barns made numerous promises, including supporting an INDEPENDENT COST ANALYSIS, once re-elected, amnesia developed and the Governor plowed forward with his back room agenda.

The costs Rep. Roger's included are merely a beginning and fail to consider increased police, fire, ambulance and DPW, as well as numerous other municipal expenses, for all surrounding towns.

Where will those low wage workers live? In substandard housing? Where will their children attend school? What tax base will be lost through CANNIBALIZATION of jobs removed from the local economy?

When the small town of Palmer, MA appointed a citizen's Casino Impact Study Group, they determined that the annual municipal costs would be $18 MILLION to $39 MILLION. [The Town Council refused to make the report public because they didn't want an 'honest' report.]

Being blinded by the Wynn/Kraft fairy dust of Fools' Gold, condemns Foxborough to an impoverished future. Does anyone even know what the Patriots' presence costs the town?

Rep. Rogers' open letter to the state gaming commission chairman

February 13, 2012
Dear Commissioner Crosby:

The citizens of the Commonwealth most directly affected by the proposed Foxborough casino are the citizens of Walpole. The proposed site, distantly situated within the border of Foxborough, directly abuts more than 500 residential homes…all of which are Walpole families. For the following reasons, this unique locus gives Walpole the legal status of a “Host Community”, as defined under Chapter 23K of the General Laws and, therefore, grants the voters of Walpole the power to vote up or down on any such project in addition to the voters of Foxborough.

Section 15 (13) of the new casino law states that “if a proposed gaming establishment is situated in 2 or more cities or towns, the applicant shall execute an agreement with each host community, or a joint agreement with both communities, and receive a certified and binding vote on a ballot question at an election held in each host community in favor of such a license.” The term “gaming establishment” includes nongaming structures “related to the gaming area and may include, but shall not be limited to hotels, restaurants or other amenities”. Such amenities will necessarily include parking, water and sewer access, emergency egress roads, and interbasin transfers in order to make the proposed casino possible. Without Walpole, the casino cannot work.

These Walpole neighborhoods are situated on land that belonged to the town of Foxborough from Colonial times until 1931. Chapter 307 of the Acts of 1931 reset the boundaries between these two towns, effective only after a majority vote of the voters of each town of the towns of Walpole and Foxborough. Any casino complex must be similarly accepted by a majority vote of the voters of each of these towns. Since Walpole has always had a unique relationship to this site, any casino development in this part of Foxborough must also receive the approval of Walpole.

In 1999, the legislature enacted Chapter 16, the so-called “Foxboro Stadium” bill. The economic development area created by the statute is made viable by the mandated infrastructure improvements on adjacent Walpole land, a cost borne by state taxpayers. Walpole is specifically cited in the law as a town whose infrastructure enhancements are necessary to promote the public safety and convenience of the Foxborough economic area. Further, the Parking and Traffic Management Zone created by the law defines the zone to include satellite parking spaces in Walpole necessary for stadium events. If so much as one parking space is altered under the current configuration, any casino developed in this economic area necessarily incorporates Walpole by statutory reference, an amenity which further renders Walpole a host community.

Section 12 of the 1999 Act authorizes sewer connections to the town of Walpole. Such a casino, with hotel, restaurants, and all-day, all-night, 365-day operations will need to hook up to Walpole’s sewer system downstream, and thereby making it a nongaming structure “related to the gaming area”, a status that even further renders Walpole a host community.

State taxpayers paid $70 million in 1999 for improvements that did not anticipate a casino since the legislature defeated a casino measure that same year. Any such newly authorized industry approved and sited here must therefore require the proponents to reimburse the taxpayers their $70 million investment, with interest. Close to $100 million, this money would be better reinvested as school aid, which would mean another $230,000 for Walpole school children, a far better investment for the future of our Commonwealth.

The casino complex must also provide alternative egress for emergency vehicles in the rear of the establishment. With thousands of consumers eating, sleeping, gambling every hour of every day throughout the year, police, fire and ambulance must have backup access on and off the premises should Route 1 become inaccessible. Since the front of the casino complex is accessed completely by Route 1 only, the alternate road connection can only come from a connection to Summer Street…in Walpole… a necessary amenity that also renders the town of Walpole, in addition to the town of Foxborough, a “host community”.

Although Foxborough land may be transferred to Walpole through the application of law (see above), the waters indigenous to this area continue to follow their natural course regardless of how or where boundary lines are drawn. The casino complex entails significant new water use and wastewater discharge seated upon the confluence of four watershed areas: the Charles River basin, the Neponset River basin, the Taunton River basin, and the Ten Mile River basin. Any such significant alteration in the natural flow patterns of Walpole’s water will trigger approval under the state’s Interbasin Transfer Act. Although this Act exempts transfers between river basins within the same municipality, transfers between Foxborough and Walpole are not exempt. Walpole’s water, whether withdrawn at an accelerated rate to accommodate the casino or recharged at lower levels because of the casino, will necessarily be a part of the casino development for the proposal to be viable.

In the unlikely chance that the voters of Foxborough vote affirmatively in the ballot box for this casino, the voters of Walpole, the People of Walpole, must also be heard.

Very Truly Yours,

John H. Rogers

State Representative

Walpole/Norwood

WalpoleNews.com . P.O. Box 144 . Walpole, MA 02081

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.

Plan to extend commuter rail to Foxboro drawing negative response

Plan to extend commuter rail to Foxboro drawing negative response
BY RICK FOSTER SUN CHRONICLE STAFF

FOXBORO - A plan to extend commuter train service to Foxboro is receiving negative reviews from area officials and citizens who submitted written comments on the proposal.

Mirick O'Connell, a Worcester law firm, sponsored a detailed study of the proposed service last fall that said a pilot program could begin as early as 2013. The study was paid for by the law firm and conducted by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, a transportation consulting company that has done work for the MBTA.

John Mirick, one of the firm's principals, has said the report eventually will be turned over to the T and said local residents were welcome to submit comments.

Mirick did not respond to calls from The Sun Chronicle concerning the status of the study or comments gathered from local officials and residents.

Letters signed by local residents and town officials have been highly critical, however. Comments questioned the lack of consultation between sponsors of the study and local communities and questioned assumptions concerning operating costs and the number of commuters the new trains would attract. One questioned whether the rail proposal is connected to a proposed Foxboro casino project proposed to be built on land owned by the Kraft Group on Route 1.

A Nov. 1 letter to Mirick by Foxboro Town Manager Kevin Paicos said local residents have raised a number of concerns relating to extension of train service "not the least of which was the perception that this study was developed and drafted without consultation with any Foxboro officials."

A letter signed by members of the Walpole Board of Selectmen on Dec. 1 called the study "misleading" and said it appeared to be focused on extending trains from the existing Fairmount Line from Readville to Foxboro rather than restoring service along the Interstate-495 beltway. The selectmen also questioned the report's $1.7 million annual operating cost estimate for a pilot program and cited "discrepancies" in the number of riders estimated in the proposal versus a much smaller number forecast in the 2010 MBTA report.

"To summarize, the Board of Selectmen questions the findings of this study, and believes that its abbreviated and minimal conclusions are not based on any solid foundation," the selectmen wrote.

On Dec. 15, the Walpole Planning Board wrote Mirick saying that its members unanimously oppose an increase in commuter trains. The board was also critical of a possible connection between the rail plan and a casino-resort proposed by Las Vegas hotel and casino mogul Steve Wynn.

"In light of the recent news from Foxboro with the Kraft/Wynn casino proposal as the requirement in the casino bill that gaming facilities must be sited near intra-modal transportation, we are suspicious that there is a relationship between this study and the casino proposal on the Kraft property," the planning board letter said. Both Mirick and the Kraft Group have denied the train study is connected to a proposed casino and that the Kraft Group merely provided "feedback" as part of the I-495 Metrowest Partnership in which both Mirick's lawfirm and the Kraft Group are active participants.

Employees of both Mirick O'Connell and Rand Whitney, one of the components of the Kraft Group listed on the company's web site, sit on the board of The Worcester Regional Research Bureau of which Rand Whitney is listed as a corporate sponsor. The regional think tank issued a report in 2007 questioning the benefits of casino gambling in Worcester.

Rand Whitney was not part of the group at the time of the report said WRRB executive Director Roberta Schaefer.

The 12-page report entitled "Casino Gambling in Worcester: The Case For and Against," concluded that gambling would generate revenue and jobs for the city but would also create negative impacts in the form of pollution, crime and other social problems that would also affect neighboring communities.

Schaefer said the Research Bureau stands by that finding.

Concern Over Casino Proposal in Foxborough

Letter to the Editor: Concern Over Casino Proposal in Foxborough
A letter to the editor addressing the casino proposal.

I am a resident of South Walpole who is very concerned about the proposed casino by Steve Wynn on land that may be leased by Robert Kraft across the street from Gillette Stadium. There are almost 500 residential homes with many families and children located within 1,000 yards of the proposed casino site. Many directly abut the proposed site. I do not believe that this is the type of site that the legislature had in mind when they passed the casino bill.

The casino and surrounding complex will be massive, and will include many bars, clubs and entertainment venues as well as multi-family dwellings according to the zoning change proposal submitted by the Kraft Group. The zoning also proposed amphitheaters, 500 foot tall wind turbines, 30 story buildings, commuter rail, and bus stations. The zoning changes, if ever adopted, would change the character of the region dramatically.

The casino could operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, for 75 years. The town will have no control of the liquor licenses. There will be tens of thousands of patrons coming and going every day of the year. I cannot imagine raising a family in the shadows of such a business. I am extremely worried about the impact this large scale development will have on our quality of life, the safety of my family, and the value of our home. If this were to pass, I do not believe we would be easily able to sell and move away even if we wanted to. Many of my neighbors share similar concerns. Due to the way the casino legislation is written, surrounding towns such as Norfolk, Walpole, or Wrentham do not get a formal vote in the process. Therefore we are mostly on the sidelines of a debate that will affect all of us for the rest of our lives

I hope that many of my fellow neighbors in our wonderful community that happen to live just over the line in Foxboro will remember the impact this project would have on everyone, including those from abutting towns who although are not members of the town of Foxboro, share and make up the same community. In the end we're all in this together.

Dave Mackey

Dear Mr. Robert Kraft, Chairman and CEO

Beacon Hill lawmakers, sorely in need of spinal transplants and too lazy to conduct their own research, suddenly awakened to the prospect of NIMBY in the flawed legislation they supported when suddenly confronted by constituent opposition.

Regardless of the neighborhood, regardless of the town, the Gambling Industry only exists because it creates NEW Gamblers because of proximity and relies on NEW GAMBLING ADDICTS.

This isn't sensible public policy that protect the Common Good by preying on those least able to afford it.

Didn't any of these lawmakers wonder why Beacon Hill refused to conduct an INDEPENDENT COST ANALYSIS?


Mr. Robert Kraft, Chairman and CEO

The Kraft Group
One Patriot Place
Foxborough, MA 02035

Dear Mr. Kraft:

We members of the General Court, who have the honor of representing the citizens of Walpole, respectfully stating on their behalf and in their best interests, that we stand united and unanimous in opposition to a casino being situated so unacceptably close to the homes and businesses in the town of Walpole. This opposition of the people was succinctly affirmed by the recent unanimous votes of the Walpole Board of Selectmen and the Walpole Planning Board, each member of each board voting to support the votes of their Foxborough counterparts to oppose the siting of a casino in Foxborough.

We remain ever mindful of your vitally important business presence in our region, your invaluable contributions to our economy, and your steady leadership in putting thousands of our citizens to work. Your philanthropy to countless charitable and worthy causes is legendary and has, no doubt, changed the course of lives of so many of our fellow brothers and sisters for the better. For your past deeds, we owe you our deep gratitude; for your future deeds, we owe you our loyal candor. Thus, to be candid, should you continue with your current casino plans, though, of course, it is your right to do so, the wonderfully rich legacy that you so admirably cultivated over the last four decades would be terribly and irreparably diminished forever in the hearts and minds of the people of Walpole who have been your willing partners and supporters for so very long.

With the utmost respect, we appeal to you, our valued neighbor, to reverse course and announce that you have heard the voice of the people and, for their prosperity and well-being, will not seek to place a casino on your land. If you do that historic deed, your great legacy will forever be enshrined.

Sincerely,

HOUSE:
John H. Rogers, 12th Norfolk
Louis L. Kafka, 8th Norfolk
Paul McMurtry, 11th Norfolk
Daniel B. Winslow, 9th Norfolk

“mad at every level”

Grab a seat and watch the unfolding of backroom deals and political corruption crafted on Beacon Hill to subsidize the Kraft/Wynn deal in Foxborough at the expense of Massachusetts taxpayers.

Transportation heads: Gillette rail plan through Walpole 'not a focus'.
By Veronica Hamlett and Dave Eisenstadter
Walpole Times


WALPOLE — The MBTA is still mum on any plans to increase commuter rail service to Foxboro via Medfield and Walpole.

In the midst of a $161 million budget and the possibility of increasing fares and reducing services, Transportation Secretary Richard Davey and MBTA acting general manager Jonathan Davis said at a Wicked Local editorial board meeting last Friday that their focus is on current projects and contracts, even though customers are calling for more.

“The MBTA has a problem that every company in America would want in that customers want more of us but we can’t deliver,” Davey said. “People want more or expanded service.”

The MBTA is working on securing a new contract for its current commuter rail services. Its contract with Massachusetts Bay Commuter Rail expires in June. Davis said the MBTA could entertain talks with a private entity willing to expand service.

“Thinking of longer term projects, perhaps we could give the opportunity to whoever the service provider is to invest their own capital and experience,” he said.

The Green Line extension to Tufts University and a South Coast rail line will continue as planned, as both are state obligations as part of the Big Dig, but neither will be paid for by the MBTA, according to Davis.

Worcester-based law firm Mirick O’Connell drafted a proposal for regular rail service from Boston to Foxboro on the Franklin line through Medfield and Walpole. The pilot program would still operate at a deficit of $1.4 million.

Local legislators are trying to prevent said expansion by amending the state budget. The senate passed an amendment last Friday 31-3 prohibiting the MBTA from expanding capital projects that would operate at a fiscal deficit. It also requires the MBTA to do a cost analysis study for any and all rail service expansion and to not proceed if the results come back unprofitable.

“This is an extremely important issue to Walpole and for the Commonwealth as a whole,” Sen. Jim Timilty (D-Walpole) said in a statement. “I share the concerns of an overwhelming number of constituents who have contacted me for months now, urging that we act appropriately on this matter. This is an issue of fiscal prudence, and it has to happen in a timely manner so that we do not add another generation of debt to our public transportation.”

Davis would not comment on the new legislation, which must now earn House approval.


“We’re committed to the green line and to South Coast rail and will not add to the debt burden the MBTA currently carries,” he said.

The MBTA is considering two proposals with different levels of fare increases and service reductions to close its $161 million budget gap. The first scenario would eliminate 60 bus routes and increase fares by an average of 43 percent. The second eliminates more than 200 bus routes, reduces the length of 11 others and would increase fares by an average of 35 percent.

The second plan eliminates the 34E bus from Walpole to Dedham.

Both plans discontinue all ferry routes, suspend all weekend trains and service after 10 p.m. on commuter rails and eliminate weekend service on the Mattapan line and Green Line E branch.

Neither plan is inevitable, but are instead being proposed to gauge what level of fare increases or service reductions customers are willing to endure, Davis said. The most drastic estimates predict a 17 percent reduction in ridership, or 94 million rides annually.

A series of public hearings are being held to gather feedback about the two proposals, including one in Framingham on Tuesday, Feb. 14 at Town Hall, from 6 to 8 p.m.

Read more: Transportation heads: Gillette rail plan through Walpole 'not a focus' - Walpole, MA - Wicked Local Walpole http://www.wickedlocal.com/walpole/news/x1672347278/Transportation-heads-Gillette-rail-plan-through-Walpole-not-a-focus#ixzz1khAtwi7Q



State Sen. Timilty rails against expanded train service in MetroWest
Senator Timilty talks about plans to expand the rail lines.

By Marc Filippino/Correspondent
Wicked Local Walpole
Posted Dec 23, 2011


WALPOLE — State Senator James Timilty is “mad at every level” at plans for a proposed commuter rail that would run through his home town of Walpole, and is looking to do everything in his power to stop it.

Timilty led a small group of reporters on a walk of the rail line near the South Walpole Post Office on Summer Street Tuesday. Along the way, he ripped the MBTA for its history of debt and questioned its ability to responsibly manage the finances of a proposed commuter rail expansion into Foxborough, Walpole, Medfield and throughout the MetroWest region.

Timilty cited a proposed pilot project’s projected $4 million annual operating loss as a sign that the project is doomed to fail.

“If [the MBTA] were a private sector agency, they’d fire everybody,” Timilty said. “30 percent of their operating budget goes to debt, and they’re thinking of spending upwards of $10 million to activate a line? They have some monumental challenges they need to deal with now.

“We were the first subway in America, and in an urban setting, we’re probably the worst,” he said. “Their systems are old and faulty, and if you’ve ever gone through Park Street, it’s a disaster.”

The controversy began in October when the Westborough-based law firm Mirick O’Connell proposed a pilot commuter rail expansion project, dubbed the 495 Rail Study, that focused on enhancing train service to Foxborough. The pilot program called for utilizing existing rail equipment, while seeing whether a long-term plan was feasible.

Walpole residents were immediately up in arms. Walpole is where the Foxborough spur splits off from the Franklin Line, and residents opposed having to bear the brunt of the constant noise from a high-speed train and the construction that would be associated with building a new rail line and station. Town officials even contacted John Mirick to register their complaints.

On Dec. 2, in a strongly worded letter to Jody Ray, director of railroad operations for the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Rep. Dan Winslow objected to expanded commuter rail service to Foxborough on the grounds that it was a taxpayer giveaway to billionaire casino gambling interests.

Winslow called for a halt to any further discussions or planning until the impacts on surrounding towns of such a service increase could be assessed, and warned, “Not one thin dime of limited public money should be spent for the private benefit of billionaires in a private transaction.”


Timilty objected not only to the Foxborough pilot project, but to the entire notion of explanded commuter rail service in the MetroWest area.

He sees the plan becoming dangerously long-term and compared commuter rail expansion to the problems that plagued the “Big Dig” project in Boston, but on a smaller scale. The pilot project alone would cost an estimated $84 million, with $6 million more annually to operate it, according to the MBTA’s 2010 Foxborough Commuter Feasibility Study Report.

With projected stops in several Norfolk County towns including Medfield, Timilty said the construction would devastate local property values, repel businesses from the area, and damage the overall quality of life.

“The American dream is have control over your own property, and for the state to take it for the greater good, there needs to be a significant cause for that,” Timilty said, referring to the possibility that Massachusetts would acquire land needed for the expansion through eminent domain.

“I have to see what happens to these communities when you have these trains,” he said. “It’s not what we need and it’s not what we can afford.”

Currently in Walpole, freight trains traverse a one-track, north-south rail twice daily. Timilty sees this single track turning into a double track, which would bring the 40-mile-per-hour commuter rail through Walpole 16 times a day, disrupting residential areas and small businesses.

Brickman Group Landscaping is located on Summer Street in Walpole, no more than 25 yards from the tracks.

Kelly Page, an employee at Brickman, said she understands the usefulness of commuter rail, since all Brickman employees must now commute by car. But she also understands the frustration of Walpole citizens. When she was living at home in Northbridge, she said, nearby train traffic disrupted the household several times a day.

“When you have a property right next to a railroad,” she said, “it’s extremely annoying, especially if you have small kids and you’re trying to get them to go to bed at night. My daughter was only five years old when the railroad was going through Northbridge and that was only a couple of times a day.

“It was loud and it shook the entire neighborhood. We had cracks in the walls and cracks in the ceilings and damage to the house, so I can see why residents would not want it.”

Still others are not as stridently opposed to expanding commuter service as Timilty.


“The MBTA has been discussing this for a number of years,” said Paul Matthew, executive director of the 495/MetroWest Partnership, a public-private collaborative that encourages development in the region. Mirick O’Connell brought the 495 Rail Study to Matthew’s group for feedback and regional input while it was being developed.

Matthew said the casino issue raised by Winslow is a red herring. “I think the discussion started long before the casino proposal and will continue long after the casino proposal,” he said. He also said casinos usually attract a more affluent crowd, which is not dependent on public transportation. [but the low wage workers are dependent on less expensive public transportation at great cost to Massachusetts taxpayers]

Matthew said this public discussion is good for the community, since towns such as Walpole will be affected the most. However, he noted the outlines in the pilot program are not permanent, and that it will take decades before the 495 Rail Study is likely to become a reality.

Timilty put it more bluntly.

“It’s a pie in the sky idea,” he said. “If it was built 50 years down the road, it may not have any impact, but right now? Can we afford it? Is it necessary? On both accounts, I offer the most vehement ‘no’ I can get out.”


Read more: State Sen. Timilty rails against expanded train service in MetroWest - Walpole, MA - Wicked Local Walpole http://www.wickedlocal.com/walpole/news/x1980198478/State-Sen-Timilty-rails-against-expanded-train-service-in-MetroWest#ixzz1khBza7Mh