Meetings & Information




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






Showing posts with label charity gambling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label charity gambling. Show all posts

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Ohio's gambling expansion: From an outright ban to casinos



Ohio's gambling expansion: From an outright ban to casinos

How the state went from banning all gaming to embracing its many forms


Ohio’s constitution bans gambling — except lotteries and charitable bingo and casinos and racinos.

Over the past 40 years, economic woes, competition from other states and changing attitudes have pushed Ohio out of its staunchly anti-gambling stance, experts said.

But that doesn’t mean the doors will open to all gambling. The state severely limits skill games and Internet cafes, and the state attorney general recently declared video bingo at veterans’ halls unconstitutional.

The difference between what’s legal and what’s illegal often depends on how easily state officials can regulate it and how consistent the revenue is, said David G. Schwartz, director of the center for gaming research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Some forms, such as sports betting, are extremely volatile.

“You don’t want to have to say we’re not buying fourth-grade textbooks because one team beat another,” Schwartz said.

Evolution of gambling


Acceptance of gambling in Ohio, and the nation, has come in waves, said Alan Silver, a gaming industry expert and assistant professor in the restaurant, hotel and tourism program at Ohio University.

Lotteries helped finance the Virginia colony and universities, such as Harvard and Yale, in the 17th and 18th centuries, but corruption led many states to ban gambling starting in the 1830s, Silver said.

Ohio officials joined that anti-gambling movement, adding a permanent ban into the 1851 constitution.

Gambling was revived following the Civil War when several southern states, most notably Louisiana, sponsored lotteries to rebuild during Reconstruction, Silver said. But additional corruption led the U.S. Congress to ban lottery sales across state lines in 1895.

The most recent wave of gambling started in the 1930s when the Great Depression left states strapped for cash, Silver said. Ohio legislators approved wagering on horses in 1933 to create jobs and raise revenue.

Ohio’s first revision of its constitutional ban on gambling came in 1973, when 64 percent of voters approved a state lottery. Because of America’s history with lotteries, they were an easier sell than other types of gambling, Silver said.

“The public becomes more and more desensitized to the morality issue of gambling, thanks to incremental exposure first by lotteries and charitable bingo, then Indian gaming, finally legalized gambling at or near home,” he said.

But casinos remained a tough sell. It took more than 30 years and four failed initiatives for Ohioans to approve four casinos in 2009. Promises of millions in tax revenue, concerns about competition from surrounding states and a lessened concern about the morality of gambling all contributed to the slim victory.

“It seems like the public is becoming more accepting of gambling,” Schwartz said. “They don’t want people to tell them what to do.”

Even though casinos have missed the mark on projected revenue, it’s unlikely voters will reverse their decision. Ohio’s constitutional ban on gambling has been all but ignored, said Rob Walgate, vice president of the anti-gambling American Policy Roundtable.

“We pretty much have it all now here in Ohio,” Walgate said.

Playing by the rules

Gambling is regulated by a plethora of state agencies because of the piecemeal way Ohioans added its many forms.

The racing commission regulates horse racing, but racinos’ slot machine-like video lottery terminals are monitored by the Ohio Lottery Commission. Charitable bingo and sweepstakes cafes are monitored by the Ohio Attorney General’s Office. Casinos are monitored by the Ohio Casino Control Commission, which technically has authority to regulate skill games, but has done little to monitor them to date.

If you’re confused, you’re not alone; customers are, too. People will call the casino commission when they have a question about video lottery machines, said John Barron, deputy executive director for the Ohio Casino Control Commission.

But having multiple agencies regulating gambling can cause more than confusion: “When you have multiple groups enforcing gaming, you have added costs, increased personnel, overlapping personnel and no unified philosophy on gaming in a state,” Silver said.

Pete Thomas, chief of the Ohio Attorney General’s Charitable Law Section, said each agency has its own expertise and motives. If charitable bingo, which benefits nonprofit organizations, was overseen by the same group that regulates for-profit casinos, then charities might receive less attention, he said.

But lawmakers have preferred this complicated form of regulation to unregulated gambling: skill-based games were greatly limited in 2007, and sweepstakes cafes were effectively banned last year.

Skill games were like slot machines but required the player to stop the wheels to avoid the chance element required in gambling. Internet or sweepstakes cafes sold Internet or phone time to play games, which required chance and not skill. Both were severely limited by new laws.

Some businesses that stopped selling sweepstakes games after the 2013 law have switched back to skill games, Thomas said. The Casino Control Commission, which was given authority to regulate them, is seeking guidance from the Joint Committee on Gaming and Wagering to understand their role.

The next bet

Although sweepstakes and skill games are far from gone, Ohio’s next gaming headache could come online.

Americans spent nearly $3 billion on illegal offshore gaming sites in 2012, according to the American Gaming Association.

To date, only New Jersey, Nevada and Delaware have legalized online gambling, but others are considering it. Last month, Delaware and Nevada governors signed an agreement to allow for-profit online poker between the states.

“Make no mistake: Online gaming is here to stay. The government cannot put the Internet back in the bottle,” American Gaming Association Geoff Freeman told members of Congress in his testimony advocating for regulation and taxing of the games.

But Silver is concerned that legalizing online gambling would threaten brick-and-mortar casinos, which have already performed short of projected revenue.

The addition of Internet gambling might require another constitutional amendment because gambling is limited to the four casinos, Barron said.

Perhaps it’ll be the next hole in Ohio’s so-called gambling ban.


http://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/interactive/article/20140308/NEWS01/303080001/Ohio-s-gambling-expansion-From-an-outright-ban-casinos

Saturday, December 14, 2013

Big league gambling: AG makes right call on casinos

Our neighbors to the north conducted an INDEPENDENT COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS that determined the high COSTS of Predatory Gambling exceeds the benefits. Yet some elected leaders still haven't figured it out.

Bravo to NH Attorney General!


30 Reasons No
CasinoFreeNH

December 12. 2013 9:34PM

Big league gambling: AG makes right call on casinos

 
The state’s Gambling Regulatory Oversight Authority voted 8-1 last week to recommend legislation that would establish a regulatory structure to oversee expanded gambling in New Hampshire. We commend Attorney General Joe Foster for having the guts to be the lone “no” vote.
Foster said that the proposal amounted to endorsing casino gambling, which he could not do. “We’re going from the little league to the big leagues in terms of the dollar costs of problem gamblers,” he said. “I remain concerned . . . about the social cost of bringing casino gambling into the state.”
The baseball analogy is a good one. New Hampshire’s existing charitable gaming infrastructure and its state-run lottery program already feed gambling addiction. A single casino would expand the problem, and virtually no one believes that the gambling doors will close behind New Hampshire’s first casino. If one comes, more will follow, whether they be resort casinos or sad little slots warehouses.
New Hampshire could go from small-time charity gambling to big-time casino gambling in the blink of an eye. Foster is right that simply having a regulatory infrastructure in place will not prepare the state for the problems that change will bring.

http://www.unionleader.com/article/20131213/OPINION01/131219665

Friday, December 13, 2013

New Hampshire: The Race to the Bottom


New Hampshire should not gamble on casinos

 
Casino operators will once again, in 2014, attempt to bamboozle the New Hampshire Legislature into approving expanding gaming.
 
Introducing Las Vegas-style casino gambling has been on the legislative docket for as long as we can remember, and each time the one-armed bandits come close. During the last session, the Senate passed Sen. Lou D'Allesandro's bill, SB 152, 16-8. That bill would have authorized a single casino with up to 5,000 slot machines and 150 table games at Rockingham Park. A House subcommittee rejected the casino bill by a single vote (thank you, Patti Lovejoy, D-Stratham) and the full House went on to defeat the bill 199-164.
 
Casino pushers were defeated despite the economic uncertainty caused by the lingering Great Recession. The bill's supporters promised money to every person and program in need and warned of dire consequences if we did not allow a casino. But common sense prevailed, the Legislature rejected gambling and New Hampshire has continued to provide essential services within a balanced budget and without selling our souls to outside casino interests.
 
And yet, like the proverbial bad penny, Sen. D'Allesandro promises to file another casino bill in 2014 that is pretty much the same as the bill defeated in 2013. It is expected to call for 5,000 slot machines and 150 gaming tables at a large single casino.
 
Slot machine champions think they have a hot hand this time because the Gambling Regulatory
Oversight Authority, which was created by pro-casino Gov. Maggie Hassan to address the state's lack of gambling regulations and oversight, has endorsed the D'Allesandro bill.
 
Objective observers might conclude that the fix was in from the start with this study group, and the fact it specifically endorsed a plan for 5,000 slot machines and 150 table games, the exact number requested in D'Allesandro's bill, undermines its credibility.
 
But the fact is, whether the Gambling Regulatory Oversight Authority acted in good or bad faith is irrelevant to the central question of whether New Hampshire should get into the casino business. The answer to that question remains a resounding "no."
 
To be clear, our opposition is not to gambling itself, but to New Hampshire linking its fortunes to the ups and downs of the casino industry. The facts clearly argue in favor of New Hampshire remaining independent and continuing on the successful and healthy path it has traveled for decades.
 
In the name of fiscal responsibility, we urge lawmakers to once again reject the fool's gold offered by casino operators and their supporters.
 
The numbers, which are the same as they were with last year's defeated bill, still don't add up to a substantial net gain for New Hampshire. Casinos have proliferated in every state where they are licensed to operate, so we are fooling ourselves if we think New Hampshire will be the exception to that well-documented story. Across the country, casino revenues have often not met expectations and have caused tax receipts to also fall short. This leads to proliferation as states feel pressured to allow more casinos to fund programs that expanded on promised casino money. Once the state gets hooked on casino money, the casino industry gains outsized influence on public policy. Once operating, casinos have been shown to hurt existing restaurant and hospitality businesses by using gambling money to subsidize meals and overpay for talent.
 
In our view, tying New Hampshire's fortunes to the gambling industry still remains a bad bet.
 
 
 

Gaming Final Report Calls for New, Three-Division System

Charitable gaming reform and two bills are also among the final recommendations issued by the state's Gaming Regulatory Oversight Authority.

Other findings include the fact that the state needs to reform charitable gaming in order to ensure the nonprofits those establishments benefit are getting their full 35 percent of the gross revenues.

The state, according to the authority, also doesn't have enough resources to "ensure the integrity of charitable gaming," due in part to the fact that surveillance and supervision of games at these locations "is plainly insufficient."

The final report is posted as a PDF above. The two bills proposed by the authority as well as the report of the authority’s consultant, WhiteSands Gaming LLC, are posted on the authority’s website at www.nh.gov/groa/index.htm.



http://salem-nh.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/gaming-final-report-calls-for-new-threedivision-system

Sunday, December 8, 2013

NH Charities opened the door to get sucked in....innocent enough....



In my opinion, charities have cut their own throats when they opened the gambling doors.

$75M bet at NH's mini casinos for charity while fight rages over legalizing commercial casino


SALEM, New Hampshire — As New Hampshire debates legalizing a commercial casino, the charities that rely on games of chance to raise millions of dollars every year worry that a big-name gambling hall would siphon off crucial revenue for the services they provide.

The 35 percent payout to charities after deducting prizes ranges from a few thousand dollars from a poker room operating three days a week to more than $60,000 from 10 days at Rockingham Park racetrack in Salem.

Wentworth-Coolidge Commission Co-chairwoman Gene Doherty says other fundraising efforts pale compared to the $37,744 the commission raised last year at Rockingham Park.

"A lot of fundraising dried up over the years. People want to give to children or the elderly," not to the upkeep of a historic building, Doherty said.

Gambling proceeds comprise 80 percent of the commission's budget, Doherty said.

"If it goes away, we will do some fundraising, but a lot of the support the state gets from us also will go away," she said.

New Hampshire has allowed the mini-casino operations since 1977 — often called Monte Carlo nights — with few limits other than on the size of the bet and the maximum days a charity can sponsor an event. Unlike commercial casinos, the maximum bet is $4, regulations aren't as stringent and video slot machines are illegal though some operators provide them as game machines that pay out prizes instead of cash.

A commission is drafting legislation to regulate casinos and casino bills are likely to arise in both houses of the legislature. A vote could come in 2014.

A law change in 2006 allowed private operators to run the games and turned the traditional Monte Carlo nights into seven-day-a-week, full-scale operations that rake in millions of dollars annually.

When the law first changed, game operators had to entice charities to sign up for game dates. Now, most have waiting lists, and state officials estimate $75 million is bet annually in the name of 389 charities.

The panel working on casino regulations also is considering a separate bill to tighten regulations governing charitable games of chance. Paul Kelley, director of the Racing and Charitable Gaming Commission, said if a commercial casino is approved, charities — especially in the southern part of the state where a casino is most likely — will feel the pinch.

One of the smaller participating charities is the Sisters of the Holy Cross in Manchester.

Sister Jacqueline Brodeur is in charge of raising money to support 103 older nuns and the nursing home that cares for many of them. The sisters receive $6,000 from gambling at Oceanfront Gaming at Hampton Beach — a "blip" in the budget, Brodeur says, but one that supplements the sisters' care and a small program in Manchester to teach English to immigrants.

Like Rockingham, Oceanfront Gaming scatters each charity's 10 dates throughout the year to give everyone some of the higher volume days.

"You always pray for a lot of summer dates. That's when people are at the beach, so you pray for summer," Brodeur said.

At Rockingham Park, the 36 charities with game dates there average $55,000 a year in profit from 10 days of gambling, the maximum days the state allows per charity. Rockingham, a potential site for a commercial casino, is the most profitable of the dozen game operators, paying 36 charities almost $2 million in fiscal 2013 — nearly half the $4.6 million charities received statewide from gambling.

Even though 190 charities are on Rockingham's waiting list, Brodeur is going to try to get in.

"We've got to look into it in order to survive," she said.

Arthur McLean, executive director of the Boys and Girls Club of Greater Derry, waited five years to get gambling dates at Rockingham. Last year, the club had four dates and raised about $20,000. This year, he expects to raise $50,000 toward its $1 million annual budget. It's not its biggest fundraiser, but if gambling revenue is cut off, McLean said programs would be reduced.

"We would lose employees. We have to keep our building open," he said.

http://m.therepublic.com/view/story/2ca51a692da549fa978b59346084f95a/NH-XGR--Charity-Gambling

Monday, August 5, 2013

Plainridge: “a culture of fear and concealment pervasive in the operations”

A very special thanks to Mary-Ann Greanier who continued to ask the Attorney General's office about their investigation of the ILLEGAL Plainridge Raffle that violated Massachusetts Charitable Gaming Laws, for researching the deed restriction that Plainridge used to intimidate and silence abutters forced to endure ENDLESS BLASTING in their backyards, for T.J. for standing up to the SLAPP suit brought by Plainridge intended to silence any opposition......




and dubious appreciation for Gary Piontkowski for revealing his inability to be trusted.....that most of us recognized long ago.

Dishonorable mention for the town leaders who failed to act to protect Plainville's Future, ignoring complaints, silencing the public and to Town Manager Joe Fernandes who genuflected too deeply....

Dishonorable mention to the media for ignoring concerns, and falling in love with the 'charismatic' Gary Piontkowski, as Mark Aresenault described him.



Gaming Commission Disqualifies Plainridge Slots Parlor

Sunday, August 4, 2013

Plainridge's Past Conduct Needs To Be Considered!

The past conduct of Plainridge has been particularly problematic and needs to seriously be considered during this process.

Please attend the Plainville Planning Board meeting MONDAY, AUGUST 5TH and raise your concerns.

If you live in Plainville or a surrounding community, it's important to recognize that the future EXPANSION of Plainridge into a Full-Blown Casino without amenities was discussed openly during an Educational Forum conducted by the Gaming Commission.
...
Plainville Town Manager, Joe Fernandes attended that hearing, yet no provisions for future EXPANSION are incuded with the AGREEMENT. There are numerous other issues not included in the agreement as well - including WATER and WASTEWATER that will cost ratepayers dearly.

Plainville was told they lacked water and would be forced to buy water from Rhode Island. Suddenly, they have enough water?

There are too many unanswered questions, including those below that folks need to stand up and ask in a public forum.


  • A letter from Plainville resident to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission about their upcoming decision as to the fitness of Plainridge to operate a gaming facility:

    Dear Commissioner Crosby,

    As you are making your decision about whether to allow Plainridge to move ahead in the application process or be disqualified because of concerns about the toleration of Mr. Piontowski's "cash withdrawals," I hope you consider these facts, as well:

    • Plainridge was in violation of the Massachusetts charitable gaming laws for more than a decade with their so-called "Plainridge Raffle." The Attorney General has recently concluded the investigation about the raffle, and Plainridge has agreed not to repeat their offense. Why the AGO has seen fit to treat the matter with such laissez faire is beyond me, especially when Plainridge — with their many lawyers always at the ready — must have known they were breaking the law. Moreover, while the AGO has found that no charitable monies were misspent, they ignored the fact that Plainridge used the raffle to ingratiate themselves to a town in which they have lobbied for expanded gambling almost since they opened the track. Plainridge received a great deal from running illegal charitable gaming — they garnered the goodwill and loyalty of residents who were not aware that laws were being broken on their behalf.

    The AGO refuses to give me anything in writing about the case. Perhaps they'll be more forthcoming for you.

    • As you know, Plainridge sued Thomas Keen, a resident of Plainville and a co-founder of No Plainville Racino, for defamation due to an anonymous posting on the group's Facebook page. Mr. Keen successfully defended himself in court, and Plainridge dropped their subsequent appeal, citing "more important matters" (around the time they were ridding themselves of Mr. Piontkowski).

    • In response to an inquiry about the projected length of blasting at the track earlier this year, residents who live on Harness Path (abutting Plainridge) were told that Plainridge is in possession of a 1999 Mutual Non-Interference Agreement between Francis Daddario and GTWO, LLC that could mean a serious lawsuit if anyone living on Harness Path dares to speak up against anything going on or anything that they fear might go on at Plainridge. The Mutual Non-Interference Agreement is a matter of pubic record (Norfolk Registry of Deeds, BK 13350, PG 416, recorded 99 Apr -2) and is attached here.

    The agreement says that the parties are "not to object to any such future development plans of the other by any of the following means: oral or written opposition to governmental permits, approvals, and or rezoning, at or in connection with hearings, town meetings, administrative proceedings and/or administrative or judicial appeals." The threat to use this Agreement against the residents of Harness Path to keep them from speaking at "hearings, town meetings, etc." when they live so close and are among the most affected from the addition of slots is a serious one, indeed, and should be considered when weighing the fitness of Plainridge to operate a gaming facility in our town.

    Respectfully,
    Mary-Ann Greanier
 

Friday, July 26, 2013

Falling in Love! And Losing All Perspective.....

As a voter, just a regular citizen, I had the great misfortune of attending a Sham Hearing in Gardner Auditorium.

Beacon Hill made a mockery of the democratic process -- Sorry, Folks! This was a Bi-Partisan Mockery!

Hearing? Nothing of the sort! Debate? Never Happened!

Anyone...Absolutely Anyone connected with this Aberration should be embarrassed.

Maybe you weren't paying attention, but some of us were, including my friend, Gladys who explained this Beacon Hill JOKE here:

Six Degrees of Suffolk Downs





More than a year ago, The Baffling Raffle conducted by Plainridge in violation of any vague interpretation of the Massachusetts Statute was questioned.

The Attorney General's Office accompanied by the Plainville Police Department swooped in, collected boxes of evidence........then DEAFENING SILENCE. The Baffling Raffle was conducted ACROSS STATE LINES, for which the FBI may or may not have been involved.

The political hacks in the Gambling Commission were put on notice, shuffled emails and brushed aside responsibility.

The BAFFLING RAFFLE was among the most BIZARRE -- it raffled opportunities to bet on the Kentucky Derby. Huh?

A Plainville kids' organization forced kids to purchase the BAFFLING RAFFLE TICKETS when they participated in sports.....apparently no one questioned beyond schmoozing. 

There's much else about Attorney General Martha Coakley's failure to act, but doesn't anyone think it odd that former Plainridge Face suddenly develops health issues and rather than merely step aside also divest any financial interest? Will he also FALL ON HIS SWORD for the BAFFLING RAFFLE DEBACLE?





Plainville, harness track reach slots deal


PLAINVILLE, Mass. (AP) — Plainville officials and the owners of the Plainridge Racecourse have reached an agreement that will pay the town more than $4 million in the first year if the harness track wins the state’s sole slots parlor license.
 
The town Board of Selectmen approved the agreement 3-0 on Monday. The agreement will be put to a town-wide referendum in September. The state gambling commission must also approve of any gambling facility.
 
‘‘This process took time and was not easy but we see this agreement as a solid and fair product as a result,’’ Plainridge President John Grogan said in a statement.
 
Board members Rob Rose and Robert Fennessy called it the most important vote they would ever take.
 
The agreement will pay the town about $2.7 million in fees [OVER 5 YEARS OR $560,000 PER YEAR] on top of $1.5 million in property taxes if the harness track wins the license.
 
Plainridge has agreed to pay $2.7 million in host community fees for the first five years in which the slots are fully operational. Over the following five years, the fee would be based on 1.5 percent of gross gambling revenue and would jump to 2 percent starting in year 11.
 
The track will pay another $1.5 million in real estate and personal property taxes on the $125 million facility that could house up to 1,250 slot machines.
 
Plainridge is one of four companies seeking the only slots parlor allowed under the state’s 2011 gambling law.
 
Raynham Park LLC wants to build at the 125-acre site of the Raynham Park simulcast facility and former dog track; Maryland-based Cordish Cos., which is now looking at Leominster following failed efforts to get the ball rolling in Boxborough and Salisbury; and Rush Street Gaming, which is searching for a site after efforts to build a slots parlor in Worcester fell through.
 
 

Plainridge Racecourse reaches deal with Plainville for slots parlor; deal needs voter approval



Under the agreement negotiated by the track, Plainridge would guarantee the town $2.8 million a year during the first five years of operations, [THAT'S $560,000 PER YEAR] Plainridge said. Over the following five years, the agreement calls for a payment to the town of 1.5 percent of gross gambling revenue, which increases to 2 percent after 10 years of operation.
‘This process took time and was not easy, but we see this agreement as a solid and fair product as a result.’
Quote Icon

Town negotiators and Plainridge officials have agreed on projections of approximately $200 million in revenue in the first year. The agreement also calls for Plainridge to pay commercial property taxes guaranteed to be $1.5 million in the first year, growing by 2.5 percent annually.

One of the track’s competitors for the license, The Cordish Cos. of Maryland, is pitching a slot parlor in Leominster, near the junction of Route 2 and Interstate 190 in the north central Massachusetts community, a company official confirmed Monday.

Cordish, a developer of Hard Rock casinos in Florida and the Maryland Live! Casino outside Baltimore, was scheduled to brief Leominster officials Monday evening on plans for the $200 million project, said Joe Weinberg, Cordish managing partner.

Cordish has long been interested in the northern half of the state and has unsuccessfully proposed a slot parlor in Boxborough and in Salisbury. Cordish prefers a northern location in part to be far from resort casino projects planned for Greater Boston and a tribal casino proposal in Taunton.

The stakes are rising for Cordish to find a community to embrace its plans. To meet deadlines set by the state gambling commission, Cordish needs to strike a deal with a host community in the next several weeks.

A Cordish project in Leominster would include a performance venue, restaurants, and other amenities, said Weinberg.

The other applicants for the slots license are Raynham Park, which has a deal with Raynham officials, and Rush Street Gaming, which has not announced a new site after failing to strike a deal with Worcester officials.

Wynn Resorts, proposing a resort casino in Everett, and MGM, which wants to build a gambling resort in Springfield, have completed their negotiations with those communities.
Mark Arsenault can be reached at marsenault@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @bostonglobemark.

Plainridge CFO Gone! Questions Loom

When Mr. Pionkowski resigned in April with the public statement 'for health reasons,' didn't anyone question why he severed his financial ties at that time?

Is everyone so IN LOVE with the Slot Barn vultures that they cease questioning?
Why was no question raised previously?

And still no one is asking about the BAFFLING RAFFLE conducted for years without a permit, only offering an opportunity to BET on the Kentucky Derby that certainly seems to violate the state's statute? That BAFFLING RAFFLE was widely publicized, conducted interstate and with the knowledge of 'the partners.'
But wait, there is MORE BREAKING NEWS!! Plainridge's CFO has now abruptly resigned. How can we trust a company that apparently doesn't have any internal controls? How can we trust anything Plainridge promises?

Questions loom over top Plainridge officials

Plainridge Plansweb
Gary Piontkowski talks about plans for Plainridge
that are tied to pending action at the Statehouse.
(Staff file photo by Martin Gavin)


Posted: Thursday, July 25, 2013 12:00 am
BY EMILY O'DONNELL SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
The Sun Chronicle

BOSTON - Financial questions have suddenly formed over the former president and chief financial officer of Plainridge Racecourse, potentially jeopardizing the Plainville racetrack's bid to become the winner of the state's only slot machine parlor license.Plainridge CFO Tim Petersen has resigned, the state's gaming commission learned this morning during a hearing on the track's viability to run a gambling operation.

That followed today's revelation that former Plainridge President Gary Piontkowski resigned earlier this year after allegedly pocketing cash from the company's money room. That information was included in an investigation by the commission's investigations and enforcement division, according to a report in today's Boston Globe.

Investigations and enforcement division director Karen Wells said at the hearing Petersen's absence is "troubling" and "raises grievous concerns" about Petersen's financial practices while with the company.

Plainridge officials made clear that neither Piontkowski nor Petersen represent the racecourse, and maintain that their case for the slots license remains strong.

Grogan said in a prepared statement: "The rigorous review of our application by the I.E.B. has made the Plainridge Racecourse an even stronger applicant. We remain very excited by our application's prospects."

Piontkowski made personal cash withdrawals from the struggling track's money room "almost on a daily basis" for years, according to the Globe report.

At the time of Piontkowski's departure, Plainridge suggested he had retired and sold his stake in the venture due to health concerns. But a report from the gambling commission's investigative arm revealed that - after meeting with investigators and reviewing Piontkowski's conduct - the track's majority owners "decided that it was not in the company's best interest to have Piontkowski remain as president," according to a copy of the report obtained by the Globe.

Investigators were unable to confirm whether the track's majority partners had knowingly approved the withdrawals, the report states.


The hearing is continuing this afternoon. The Sun Chronicle is tweeting from the scene and will have a full report here and in Friday's print edition.


http://www.thesunchronicle.com/plainville/questions-loom-over-top-plainridge-officials/article_e3fd3e38-c2e9-5058-a65b-e85134a5a0a1.html

Thursday, July 25, 2013

Pionkowski Embezzlement Explains Abrupt Departure

Maybe someone will address Plainridge's BAFFLING RAFFLE!

From our friends at No Plainville Racino:




BREAKING NEWS: The Boston Globe has an article about Gary Piontkowski's departure that may have been a result of nearly daily cash withdrawals from Plainridge:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/07/24/background-check-tripped-plainridge-chief/1kVCV0wnguWrTdX016MfbI/story.html?s_campaign=email_BG_TodaysHeadline

State investigators vetting Plainridge Racecourse for a slot parlor license discovered that track president Gary T. Piontkowski made personal cash withdrawals from the struggling track’s money room “almost on a daily basis” for years, a red flag that apparently led to Piontkowski’s abrupt resignation in April.

At the time of Piontkowski’s departure, Plainridge suggested he had retired and sold his stake in the venture due to health concerns. But a report from the investigative arm of the state gambling commission reveals that — after meeting with investigators and reviewing Piontkowski’s conduct — the track’s majority owners “decided that it was not in the company’s best interest to have Piontkowski remain as president,” according to a copy of the report obtained by the Globe.

Investigators were unable to confirm whether the track’s majority partners had knowingly approved the withdrawals, the report states.

Multiple efforts to reach Piontkowski, of Rhode Island, were unsuccessful Wednesday. For decades he had been one of the most prominent names in the Massachusetts racing industry. He headed the state racing commission in the early 1990s and later helped found Plainridge, a harness racing track that opened in 1999. He was the charismatic public face of the track’s long effort to win the right to add slot machines, and seemed enormously proud last year when Plainridge became the first applicant to pay the mandatory $400,000 fee to apply for a state casino license.

His abrupt departure in the spring was a shock, coming just months before the commission intended to award the coveted license he had worked years to earn.

The revelations tied to the former president could affect Plainridge Racecourse’s pursuit of Massachusetts’ sole slot parlor license.


“I am deeply grateful to my business partners at Plainridge for their faith and support as well as for their understanding for this personal decision,” Piontkowski said in an April statement issued by the track.

Piontkowski was replaced by John Grogan, a graduate of Harvard Business School and a former consultant for Plainridge.

Grogan swiftly took steps to revamp internal controls and policies, according to the report, which the state gambling commission is expected to discuss at a critical hearing Thursday morning. A redacted version of the investigative report will be released during the hearing.

The revelations could affect the track’s pursuit of Massachusetts’ sole slot parlor license, which will be awarded through a competition among five well-heeled developers and gambling companies. Each applicant must pass an intensive background check, designed to weed out companies with shaky finances or questionable corporate ethics.

It is unclear how the commission will address the cash withdrawals.

The panel has the power to disqualify an entire application or impose conditions; the other key people in the Plainridge venture were positively reviewed by investigators.

Representatives of both the commission and of Plainridge declined to comment before the report is released.

What seems clear in the report is that Timothy Petersen, the chief financial officer for the track and Ourway Realty, the corporate entity under which Plainridge is seeking the slots license, grew uncomfortable with the money room practices and tried to bring attention to the withdrawals.

In their report, investigators said that Plainridge recorded Piontkowski’s cash withdrawals in its accounting books, classifying the withdrawals as money Piontkowski owed the business.

“When this money was not repaid, it was re-characterized at the end of each year as a ‘distribution’ to Piontkowski” over and above his regular pay, the report states.

The total amount is not available in the report, but investigators wrote that the small withdrawals added up annually “to a rather large sum of money.”

“When questioned further . . . about these withdrawals, Petersen again stated that he did not feel that, at the time of their occurrence, it was his place to bring this practice to the attention of Ourway majority owners” Alfred Ross or Stanley Fulton, the report states. Petersen indicated to investigators that he had trusted that Piontkowski had received approval from the partners.

However, due to his ongoing concern, Petersen several years ago asked the track’s outside auditor to “prepare a letter each year listing the annual withdrawals taken by Piontkowski and request approval of the majority members, Fulton and Ross, to treat as a distribution to Piontkowski,” the report states.

The outside auditor told investigators the letters were prepared and submitted annually to Piontkowski beginning in 2008.

“However, the outside auditor indicated that although these letters were submitted to Piontkowski each year, it was not until February 2012 when he actually received the letter back signed by Fulton and Ross,” the report states. “Although the investigation confirmed that such money room distributions did occur, it could not definitively confirm whether such distributions were knowingly approved by Fulton.

In fact, in his first interview, Fulton denied having any recollection of having approved these distributions.”

Ross told investigators that “there had been too much control vested in Piontkowski,” the report states.

The state’s 2011 casino law created licenses for three resort casinos and one slot parlor. Though limited to 1,250 slot machines and no table games, the slot license has become the most sought-after casino license in the state.

Town officials in Plainville, where Plainridge is located at the junction of Interstate 495 and Route 1, have signed a deal with the track that would permit it to compete for the license, if voters approve the deal at a September referendum and the track clears the background check.

The commission has already reviewed background reports for The Cordish Companies, seeking to build a slot parlor in Leominster, and an affiliate of Rush Street Gaming, which intends to build in Millbury. The panel approved those companies as bidders.

The panel on Friday plans to discuss the background report for Raynham Park.

The final slot applicant is Penn National Gaming, planning to build in Tewksbury. Penn’s background check is still underway.


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


Monday, March 4, 2013

CORRECTION: Plainville Meeting March 5, 6:30 PM

Public perception is everything!
 
 
 
 
The meeting is at the Wood School on Messenger Street.

ATTENTION! Plainville Board of Selectmen meeting on TUESDAY, MARCH 5
Interview and Potential Engagement of Cummings Associate as Plainville's Gam[bl]ing Consultant.
At the WOOD SCHOOL on MESSENGER STREET in PLAINVILLE
6:30 PM

PLEASE ATTEND!!!
PLEASE POST WIDELY!




Here is the list of companies who submitted proposals to become the "Gam[bl]ling Consultant" for Plainville:

• B&S Consulting Services of Stonington, Connecticut

• Community Preservation Associates of Arlington, MA

• Center for Policy Analysis at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth

• Cummings Associates of Arlington, MA

Cummings Associates is the company the town decided to interview and probably hire.

The committee to look at the proposals consisted of:
Acting Police Chief Alfred
Fire Chief Joubert
Water/Sewer Superintendent Jim Marshall
Superintendent of Schools Raiche
Tax Collector/Treasurer Kathy Parker
 
 
Where's the public included? So much for 'transparency' !  
 
 
And the 'BAFFLING RAFFLE' that remains undefined?
 


It might seem that the AG is still Kicking The Can Down The Road!
 
 
Thank you, Dan.

Actually, I only wanted to know if the matter was ongoing, had been dropped, had been settled, or if charges had been filed. Thank you for letting me know that the matter is still ongoing.

Best regards,
Mary-Ann




On 4 Mar 2013, at 11:01, Ferullo, Daniel (AGO) wrote:

> Mary-Ann,
>
> I conferred with the attorneys in my division with regard to your current email inquiry. They have concluded that, since this matter is still ongoing, we are unable to provide you with an update. You are welcome to submit another formal written public records request; however, please be advised that, given the attorneys' conclusion regarding this email inquiry, the response most likely will be similar to the one given to you following your initial formal written public records request.
>
> If you have any further questions or concerns in the meantime, please feel free to contact me.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dan Ferullo
>
>
>
> Daniel F. Ferullo
> Investigator
> Public Charities Division
> Business and Labor Bureau
> Office of the Attorney General
> 617 727 2200 ext. 2115
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mary-Ann Greanier
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 11:42 AM
> To: Ferullo, Daniel (AGO)
> Cc: Crosby, Steve (MGC)
> Subject: Plainridge Raffle
>
> Hello, Dan,
>
> As the process moves along in Plainville toward the application for slots at Plainridge, I and other citizens have become more and more curious about the Attorney General's investigation into the so-called "Plainridge Raffle." It was April of last year when the raffle was first brought to the attention of the AG, but we have not heard anything about it from the MGC, the Attorney General's office, or the press since the Plainville Police Department confiscated records from Plainridge. My request for information in September of 2012 was denied (response attached).
>
> As you can imagine, citizens of Plainville are concerned about whether Plainridge broke Massachusetts Charitable Gaming laws, and what the AG and the MGC plan to do about it if they did. I can't imagine anyone wants this question to remain unresolved when Plainville voters are asked to cast their ballots in a referendum for a Host Community Agreement.
>
> I am writing to you because you were my initial contact at the AG's office. I would appreciate any guidance you can give about the proper person or people in the AG's office to help me answer this question.
>
> Best regards,
> Mary-Ann Greanier

Monday, February 25, 2013

Taunton: A Pittance

Wait until Taunton figures out what those Low Wage Jobs cost and how flawed the Agreement is.



Agreement between Mashpee Wampanoags, Taunton City Council would protect bingo if casino comes to town
By Gerry Tuoti
Posted Feb 23, 2013

Although conventional wisdom may dictate that the prospect of a casino coming to town would hurt local churches and charitable organizations that bring in revenue through bingo games, those organizations could actually stand to see a modest increase in cash.

Under the terms of the intergovernmental agreement inked last year between the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and the Taunton City Council, the tribe would make payments to charitable bingo operations to offset a loss of revenue caused by a tribal casino, plus an extra 5 percent.

The arrangement calls for the tribe to pay each identified charity an annual sum that would bring each charity’s bingo revenue to 105 percent of its typical level.

The tribe added that provision to the intergovernmental agreement last spring after residents commenting at a public meeting raised concerns about the proposed casino’s potential impact on local bingo games, particularly at Our Lady of Lourdes School.

Under the arrangement, the city would present the tribe with a list of identified charities and accounting records to determine how much each charity brings in through bingo in a typical year. The tribe would then make annual payments to the charities to offset any loss in bingo revenue, bringing the charities’ total bingo revenue to 105 percent of their typical annual pre-casino take.

The charities must consistently run bingo games to be eligible under the terms of the agreement.
The Mashpee hope to build a $500 million resort casino on 146 acres in East Taunton. The proposal passed a citywide referendum last June, although many in that section of the city adamantly opposed the plan, raising concerns of negative impacts on safety, infrastructure and quality of life.

The amount the Mashpee would pay out to charitable bingo operations would be dwarfed by other payments the tribe would make to the city in exchange for agreeing to host the casino. The intergovernmental agreement, ratified last year by the Taunton City Council and the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribal Council, calls for the tribe to pay Taunton approximately $33 million in upfront infrastructure mitigation funds and an additional annual payment of nearly $13 million. Included in the annual payment is 2.05 percent of slot machine revenue, or a minimum of $8 million.

The tribe is currently awaiting a decision from the Bureau of Indian Affairs as to whether the federal government will take land in trust for the tribe to establish a reservation for the purpose of building a casino.

The Mashpee say they are working with Gov. Deval Patrick to negotiate a new casino compact between the state and tribe. The BIA rejected a previously agreed upon compact on the grounds that its revenue sharing provision was unfair to the tribe.


Read more: http://www.heraldnews.com/news/x846061447/Agreement-between-Mashpee-Wampanoags-Taunton-City-Council-would-protect-bingo-if-casino-comes-to-town#ixzz2LvJWd5ZC

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Gambling becomes addiction when one 'has to gamble'




Gambling becomes addiction when one 'has to gamble'

Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2012
By Rich Suwanski Messenger-Inquirer
Owensboro Messenger Inquirer

Gambling becomes addiction when one 'has to gamble'

Gambling becomes addiction when one 'has to gamble'

Photo illustration by John Dunham, Messenger-Inquirer/jdunham@messenger-inquirer.com, 926-0123 Kentucky had 9,000 addicted or pathological gamblers in 2008, according to the University of Kentucky Survey Research Center. According to the survey, the game of choice is slot machines. Lottery games are the next most-popular wagering form, followed by horse racing and charitable gaming, such as bingo and pull tabs.


Lots of people bet on the Super Bowl and Kentucky Derby, play the NCAA basketball tournament office pool, or spend a couple of dollars when the lottery jackpot reaches an attractive plateau.

Those events occur just a few times a year, and most who gamble on them typically do so for fun. But a small segment of gamblers wager as a lifestyle or habit, often risking more money than they can afford. They seek the rush of playing as much as a winning outcome.


http://www.messenger-inquirer.com/news/local/article_fa038500-0082-5e31-912e-749ab9178af2.html

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Casinos may hurt bingo charities


Casinos may hurt bingo charities
New Mass. gambling option likely to cut revenue
By Chris Camire
09/23/2012

Each week, thousands of people across the state crowd into church halls and civic clubs hoping to yell a five-letter word that has provided a rush since childhood: BINGO!



Nancy Parker of Billerica holds her $500 prize for winning a round of bingo at the Elks Lodge in Tewksbury Tuesday night. She's been playing for about 35 years. SUN / JULIA MALAKIE


While players are hoping to win some cash, bingo nights also serve a worthy cause -- raising millions of dollars for charity. But bingo nights could face competition when three resort casinos and one slot parlor open in different regions of the state as early as 2015.

"Anytime there is a new gaming venture, or a new type of gaming entered into a marketplace, whether it be an expansion of Lottery or an introduction of casinos, there will some impact," said Beth Bresnahan, director of marketing and communications for the state Lottery. "We certainly expect one on traditional Lottery sales, and there will be some on charitable gaming."

Charitable gambling in Massachusetts grosses approximately $75 million annually, about $18 million of which is retained by the sponsors of the events, according to a report recently released by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission.

Bingo is by far the most popular game, with $38.8 million being wagered in 2011 alone. Of that, $1.6 million was retained by the charitable sponsors and $30.7 million was returned to players in the form of prizes.

Nearly 200 games are conducted throughout the state annually, typically on a weekly basis. Over the years, bingo games have been in steady decline, however.

Licensed sponsors of charitable gaming events include churches, veterans groups, civic organizations and youth groups. In many cases, the gambling revenue generates the bulk of the funding these organizations donate to charity.

In Greater Lowell, local organizations made a combined $194,512 in profits from bingo games in Billerica, Chelmsford, Lowell and Tewksbury in 2011. In Middlesex County, 31 organizations earned $1.4 million in total profits last year. The gross receipts for bingo games totaled $7.4 million.

Alan Rock, who runs bingo night at the Elks Lodge No. 2070 in Tewksbury, said the impact casinos have on his Tuesday night bingo game will likely be determined by how their proximity to the lodge.

Some of the regions under consideration as possible sites for casinos include downtown Springfield, Suffolk Downs racetrack in East Boston, Taunton, Milford, Palmer and New Bedford. Slot parlors have been proposed in Charlton, Plainville and Raynham.

The Tewksbury lodge attracts about 160 people per week, charging $10 per card. The money raised is used to give scholarships to local students, fund Thanksgiving dinners for senior citizens, and buy dictionaries for every third-grade student in Tewksbury and Wilmington.

"We may take a small hit, but I'm not sure how much of one," said Rock.

Still, Rock said any reduction in the number of people playing bingo would force the organization to cut back on its charitable giving.

Bresnahan said people often go to bingo for camaraderie they may not get in casinos.

"The emotional attachment to a bingo game, or a bingo location, and knowing while you enjoy the game, you're also helping the associated nonprofit raise money, there's a stronger emotional tie that players or people who frequent those games have," she said.

Bingo was banned in Massachusetts for nearly 30 years, starting in the 1940s.

The ban was overturned in 1971 by Gov. Francis Sargent.

In 2009 there were 212 organizations licensed to conduct bingo in the Bay State. Each week they attracted proximately 30,000 weekly players who spent over $62.4 million.

The maximum bingo prize amounts have increased over time from $50 when the law was first passed, to $3,000 in 2000. Churches and nonprofits are allowed to host bingo twice a week.

Bingo in Massachusetts already faces competition from New Hampshire. And in 1986, a bingo hall opened in Connecticut that would one become Foxwoods Casino.

Foxwoods now advertises that its 3,600-person bingo hall is considered among the world's largest.

Bresnahan is hopeful that casinos will attract a different type of bingo player than local charity groups.

"Bingo games they offer are not high-stakes," she said. "If you look at the games casinos have, those are high-stakes games with much higher entry points and prizes."

Read more: http://www.lowellsun.com/todaysheadlines/ci_21613302/casinos-may-hurt-bingo-charities#ixzz27PEn2FE1

Friday, July 27, 2012

Plainridge: Blurring the Lines

You want to contribute to community organizations?

WRITE A CHECK!  




Don't promote GAMBLING!


Maybe Commissioner McHugh, Retired Judge need to hear people asking questions.

Commissioner McHugh <James.mchugh@state.ma.us>






Charity to be the winner at Plainridge RacecourseFriday, July 27, 2012 - from Plainridge Racecourse

Plainville, MA --- Plainridge Racecourse will race five special Saturday afternoon programs, beginning on July 28. And when it does, the track will present one of its most ambitious and interactive promotions.
The Plainville Community Challenge will feature individuals from businesses and organizations located in Plainville, Mass. competing against one another in a series of exhibition races. For the next four Saturdays, two events will be contested on each card, which will yield a total of eight winners.

This "Elite Eight" will then square off on Saturday August 25, with the top four moving on to the final, which will be part of the Bert Beckwith Day festivities on Monday Sept. 3.

Each entity will be competing for a designated charity, and all money won during the entire competition will be donated during a Beckwith Day ceremony.

“At this time we plan on having some fun with our local community and to help out some local organizations,” Plainridge General Manager Steve O’Toole said.

The contestants on the opening Saturday will be the Plainville Lions Club and the Plainville Athletic League. In the weeks to come action will feature competition between employees and/or patrons of local bars, restaurants and stores, etc.

Post Time for the Saturday cards will be at 1 p.m., eastern. Because Plainridge has added these five special Saturday programs, there will be no racing on Tuesdays until further notice.







When is a BRIBE a BRIBE?




Ala. gambling trial judge wants bribery clarity

 Thursday, July 26, 2012

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — The judge who presided over Alabama's two gambling corruption trials said the U.S. Supreme Court needs to clear up when a campaign contribution constitutes a bribe.

U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson issued an opinion saying that even though the trials ended with total acquittals for the eight defendants, he wanted to "highlight a murky field of federal law."

He wrote that there is "considerable confusion" about how federal corruption laws apply to campaign contributions, and a precise definition of bribery would help.

The U.S. Justice Department, which prosecuted the gambling cases, had no immediate comment. Some defense attorneys contacted for comment said they had not had time to study the judge's 33-page opinion.

The two trials before Thompson involved legislators and casino lobbyists accused of promising millions in campaign contributions in return for votes on pro-gambling legislation.

In Thompson's opinion Tuesday, he wrote that it's normal for politicians to seek campaign contributions and for donors to contribute to politicians to share their views. But he said the offer or acceptance of a contribution crosses the line if the money is conditioned on the politician performing a specific official action.

In one case, he said the U.S. Supreme Court said the contribution must be "made in return for an explicit promise or undertaking" to be considered a bribe. But he noted that the court did not explain what those terms include.

He said the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals tried to clarify the issue in former Gov. Don Siegelman's bribery case involving contributions to his lottery campaign. The court said "explicit" does not mean that the promise has to be in writing or that it must be overheard by a third party.

Thompson said he tried to provide more clarity in his instructions to the juries in the two trials in Montgomery, but the Supreme Court needs to do more to remove uncertainty about when a campaign contribution becomes a bribe.

"Uncertainty in this area of law breeds corruption and chills legitimate political speech," he wrote.