Massachusetts Environmental Official Speaks Well of Wynn Everett Casino

July 16, 2016

A Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) official recommended that Wynn Boston Harbor, a $2.1-billion project for the establishment of a casino complex on the Everett waterfront, be granted a much-needed environmental permit to proceed with construction.

Work on the hotel and casino complex was halted four months ago after Somerville Mayor Joseph Curtatone appealed a key waterfront permit that the casino had been granted earlier this year. Mayor Curtatone has long been among the staunchest opponents of the project.

Since granted a casino license by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission more than two years ago, gambling operator Wynn Resorts has had to overcome multiple hurdles related to its plan to build the Everett casino. The dispute with the neighboring City of Somerville seems to be the last one on its way towards materializing the ambitious project.

On Friday, Jane Rothchild, a DEP hearing official, said in a 50-page decision that the gambling operator should be given the controversial waterfront permit, only if it follows certain conditions related to the better use of the future resort’s harbor area and the provision of wider open space around the complex.

For instance, Ms. Rothchild proposed the addition of a fishing pier, ferry service, a canoe and kayak launch, and many more. She also recommended that open space around the complex be increased to 6.5 acres, instead of the initially projected 4.5 acres. According to the official, the DEP permit’s term should be 50 years and not the 85 years proposed in the original permit from earlier this year.

Ms. Rothchild wrote in her decision that the Wynn Resorts’ efforts to clean up an area which has been contaminated with various pollutants for decades should be recognized and acknowledged.

It is now up to DEP Commissioner Martin Suuberg to determine whether the gambling operator should be granted the waterfront development permit. Mr. Suuberg is expected to make his ruling in the next several weeks. However, according to people with knowledge of the matter, Ms. Rothchild’s recommendation bodes well for the project.

Mayor Curtatone told media that he is still considering the possibility to appeal the DEP permit to the Supreme Court. According to Somerville’s top official, Wynn Resorts should invest more finances and efforts in dealing with environmental issues that may come as a result from the casino’s construction, including increased traffic.

http://www.casinonewsdaily.com/2016/07/16/massachusetts-environmental-official-speaks-well-wynn-everett-casino/

Towns neighboring New Bedford all express interest in compensation for casino impacts

Fairhaven, Dartmouth, Acushnet, Freetown, others could seek money for increased traffic, class sizes, use of public services, and more, if negotiations unfold with New Bedford developer

Andrew Stern, operating partner of KG Urban Enterprises, takes a look at an advertisment promoting the casino during the day of the city vote in June. Stern's group will have to be dealing not just with New Bedford, but with neighboring towns as well. PETER PEREIRA/THE STANDARD-TIMES

By Mike Lawrence
mlawrence@s-t.com

Posted Jul. 11, 2015 at 10:01 PM 

NEW BEDFORD — The use of casino dollars for costs associated with upgrading the Howland Road bridge from Fairhaven into New Bedford, where the road becomes Coggeshall Street, is one of many topics that could be on the table in coming weeks, as SouthCoast towns consider potential impacts from the $650 million casino project proposed for New Bedford’s waterfront.

“We’re just at the starting point of having discussions with surrounding towns,” Fairhaven executive secretary Jeffrey Osuch said Thursday. “There will be issues ranging from traffic concerns to housing concerns to potential addiction concerns.”

Less than a month after New Bedford residents gave a landslide show of support for a waterfront casino — with 73 percent of voters in favor June 23 — Fairhaven, Dartmouth, Acushnet and Freetown are all exploring potential casino impacts in their communities and, in varying degrees, the potential for financial compensation.

“Several of the towns have contacted us and asked us to weigh in on the impacts,” said Steve Smith, who served as executive director of the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District, or SRPEDD, for more than 30 years before retiring June 30.

Smith, who was in the office Wednesday in his new capacity as a part-time consultant, said SRPEDD has previously evaluated impacts for communities near other Massachusetts casino proposals.

“We played that role in the case of the Raynham application,” Smith said, referring to the Taunton-area town’s unsuccessful application for the state’s single slots parlor license.

SRPEDD also was involved in the slots process, Smith said, by sitting in on meetings between developer Penn National Gaming and communities near Plainville, which won the state's single slots license. Plainridge Park Casino opened June 24.

A similar pre-licensing process now is unfolding in SouthCoast.

“I’ve had both Acushnet and Freetown reach out to me for assistance,” Smith said. He added that SRPEDD staff had heard from Dartmouth and Fairhaven officials, as well.

New York-based developer KG Urban Enterprises and New Bedford are competing with developer Mass Gaming & Entertainment, which is proposing a $650 million casino project on a Brockton Fairgrounds site, for the sole commercial casino license the Massachusetts Gaming Commission can allocate in southeastern Massachusetts.

Smith said whether to involve SRPEDD in the mitigation process for communities near New Bedford is up to KG Urban. State gaming law allows regional planning authorities to facilitate impact assessments for casino agreements.

“So far, there’s been no contact in that regard,” Smith said Wednesday.

Osuch said Thursday that KG Urban had not yet contacted Fairhaven, either. Dartmouth Town Administrator David Cressman said the same.

But Cressman said Gaming Commission representatives had reached out to town officials recently, to make them aware of surrounding community rights under state law.

KG Urban spokesman Andrew Paven commented briefly last week on surrounding community negotiations, saying he didn't think the developer had yet reached out to towns neighboring New Bedford. Those talks could heat up ahead of the Sept. 30 deadline for submitting final application materials to the Gaming Commission.

KG Urban’s negotiations with New Bedford early this year were conducted in a contentious, late-winter flurry aided by deadline extensions from the Gaming Commission. The talks culminated in an 11th-hour host community agreement signed on the morning of March 19, hours before Mayor Jon Mitchell and KG Urban representatives presented the deal at a commission meeting later that day.

The timeline for the next legal front, surrounding community negotiations, became clearer at a Thursday meeting of the Gaming Commission in Boston.

If surrounding community agreements for towns that want to be involved are not included in KG Urban’s final application Sept. 30, those towns would have a window in early October to petition to the Gaming Commission.

The five-member commission then could rule by Nov. 30 on whether those towns would be granted “surrounding community” status. That would then trigger a 30-day negotiation period, through December, in which towns granted that status could negotiate compensation agreements with KG Urban.

“The amount of money they get paid is going to be right at the top of the list,” Smith said, saying traffic, housing, schools and crime also are common issues in surrounding community negotiations.

If towns don’t reach agreements, arbitration could result in January 2016 decisions. Attorney Jonathan Silverstein of Boston-based firm Kopelman & Paige, who represents New Bedford in casino matters, said last week that it would be “baseball-style” arbitration, in which each side makes a best and final offer and an arbitrator chooses one of the two.

Silverstein has represented host and surrounding casino communities across Massachusetts. He’ll represent Acushnet, as well, and is representing several communities surrounding Brockton’s casino proposal: Holbrook, Stoughton and Abington so far.

“Every case is going to be very different,” Silverstein said.

Other MA deals

Cities and towns near casino proposals elsewhere in Massachusetts — successful and not — have sought compensation in recent years for an array of impacts, as the commonwealth’s casino era begins.

The most prominent disputes are unfolding in Boston, where Wynn Resorts’ $1.75 billion Everett casino is facing ongoing litigation on numerous fronts, including emphatic efforts by the City of Boston to revoke the casino’s license, or to be named a host community for the project.

Less-contentious casino deals elsewhere in the state, though, could provide a clearer picture of the kind of negotiations that could lie ahead for SouthCoast towns.

West Springfield, for example, received — via arbitration — a May 2014 agreement that includes a $665,000 up-front payment from MGM Springfield. The payment is expressly for design and permitting costs for the reconstruction of Memorial Avenue in West Springfield. The avenue is a major transportation route to the future MGM Springfield casino.

Silverstein represented West Springfield in its negotiations with MGM. A total of six towns and two cities in the Springfield area reached agreements with the developer. Longmeadow won arbitration, as well, receiving $850,000 up front and 13 annual payments of $275,000 in the April 2014 agreement.

West Springfield’s agreement also includes annual payments, of at least $425,000 a year. At least $50,000 of those payments, annually, will go toward “look-back studies,” which will assess casino impacts and potential talking points for additional compensation in future years.

Funding for such studies is included in many casino agreements across the state, as cities and towns enter the foreign territory of commercial gaming.

“This is new to all of us,” Osuch said.

MGM Springfield is an $800 million project, compared to the $650 million estimate for KG Urban’s Cannon Street Station in New Bedford. West Springfield also has nearly double the population of Fairhaven, and is larger than any town surrounding New Bedford.

But its location across the water from Springfield could create traffic impacts and other concerns comparable to Fairhaven’s, Smith said.

“On the surface, it would seem to be fairly close,” Smith said.

Fairhaven selectmen agreed unanimously Monday to direct town counsel to reach out to surrounding towns and to SRPEDD, to discuss casino impacts. The city also intends to file notices with KG Urban and the state Gaming Commission, Osuch said, indicating the town wishes to receive “surrounding community” status that can lead to compensation.

Fairhaven Town Counsel Thomas Crotty said Monday that he would reach out to Kopelman & Paige for potential representation, meaning Silverstein could wind up negotiating casino deals for most of greater New Bedford.

Crosstown traffic

Osuch said data such as traffic thresholds on Fairhaven intersections and roads, including Howland and the Coggeshall bridge, could be analyzed for potential needs such as signal upgrades, turning lanes and more.

“We don’t have a full understanding of what the actual impacts are, and that’s what we have to do some homework on,” he said.

Smith said assessing regional traffic impacts from a New Bedford casino could be easier than assessing multi-direction impacts in Raynham and Plainville, because here, "there just aren't that many ways to access the site.”

Route 6 would be a major secondary access route, he said, but those renovations — including to the New Bedford-Fairhaven Bridge — would involve the state and largely be outside the purview of a surrounding community agreement.

“It’s not going to be Fairhaven’s ability to fix that bridge,” Smith said. “Fairhaven could certainly make the request, you know, ‘Do something to try to get the state moving on that project,' but it’s really sort of beyond the local jurisdiction.”

Silverstein said monetizing traffic impacts can be difficult, and vary by situation.

"It’s a bit of an art, as opposed to a science,” he said. 

Fire and EMS calls

Public services in New Bedford interact significantly with services in neighboring towns, meaning an influx of casino crowds into the city could have affects on outlying areas.

“We’re looking at a 15 percent increase in people who are in the city at any one time,” New Bedford Fire Chief Michael Gomes said, citing potential casino crowds of 12,000 to 15,000 people per day. “If you have people who are transiting from other communities to get here, there certainly is increased risk for services from those communities.

“The risks of auto accidents, medical calls and things of that nature will certainly go up,” he said.

Gomes said about 15 percent of emergency medical service (EMS) calls in New Bedford involve some form of mutual aid, either from private ambulance agencies or surrounding towns.

“I do believe that Acushnet comes into the city about 10 times a month, on average, for ambulance support,” he said.

Mark McGraw, the city’s EMS director, said city dispatchers call for ambulance support from surrounding towns after all four of its private contractors are unavailable.

“Mutual aid is a funny thing,” he said. “Sometimes, within a matter of half an hour, we’ve got everybody and his brother in the city,” while other days are slow.

McGraw said the department has looked at studies from other casino towns to gauge impacts. Other communities saw more traffic accidents, McGraw said, but didn’t see much of an increase on the medical side.

“I don’t think it was all that significant,” McGraw said, referring to overall casino impacts on emergency services in other communities.

Water, sewer services

Ron Labelle, commissioner of the city’s Department of Public Infrastructure, said there’s room for the city to grow in water and wastewater capacity, including in its services to surrounding towns.

A report provided by KG Urban in 2014 estimated that a waterfront casino could use 100,000 to 200,000 gallons of water per day.

Labelle called that amount negligible to city water treatment, which he said is operating only at about half capacity.

The city’s water treatment plant has the ability to produce 45 million gallons of water a day, Labelle said, but is only treating about 18 million gallons a day in high-demand summer months.

“We have tremendous capacity to provide water and wastewater services, so a couple hundred thousand gallons of water is minimal,” he said. “It’s really not that much.”

Labelle said a casino “wouldn’t adversely affect our ability to provide any services to (surrounding towns), water or wastewater.”

The shared services are substantial.

“Dartmouth buys a lot of water from us in the summertime, because their wells can’t handle the summer demand,” he said. “Acushnet buys all of its water from us.”

New Bedford provides Fairhaven with water on an emergency basis, according to Labelle, while the city takes in sewage from Acushnet, Dartmouth and Freetown.

New Bedford sends some of its sewage to Fairhaven, he added.

Clock ticking

Osuch and Cressman said Fairhaven and Dartmouth, respectively, are just beginning to assess potential casino impacts and compensation.

“We’re in the initial stages, we’re starting to look at what other communities have looked at and done,” Cressman said.

Silverstein said he’s seen a variety of situations.

“I’ve negotiated some surrounding community agreements fairly quickly, and others have taken a longer time,” he said.

Silverstein said the time period facing communities surrounding New Bedford should be workable.

“Would I love to have more time? Sure,” Silverstein said. “(But) it certainly isn’t all that unusual.”

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/article/20150711/NEWS/150719846/101061/json

Lawsuits against Massachusetts Gaming Commission remain in play

Massachusetts loses bid to toss Boston lawsuit on casino

Posted: Friday, July 10, 2015

BOSTON (AP) — Massachusetts gambling regulators on Thursday lost their bid to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Boston challenging the award of the state’s most lucrative casino license to Wynn Resorts.

In a lengthy hearing covering three lawsuits related to the Wynn project, Suffolk Superior Court Judge Janet Sanders denied the Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s request to dismiss Boston’s lawsuit outright. The commission had argued that the city’s 153-page lawsuit was “effectively unanswerable” because it was so verbose.

The judge, addressing a range of other issues Thursday, also rejected Boston’s efforts to begin taking testimony from witnesses in the highly charged case.

Sanders said she’ll hold a Sept. 22 hearing to consider the state’s other arguments for throwing out the lawsuit. Among those arguments is that the casino licensing competition and award process is not subject to judicial review.

Thomas Frongillo, a private attorney representing Boston, said the case raises serious questions about the integrity of the state’s gambling regulatory process. “This is a significant case for the public,” he said, arguing that Boston’s lengthy complaint was warranted because the alleged misconduct pervaded virtually every aspect of the multiyear licensing process.

Boston and two other cities — Revere and Somerville — have filed separate lawsuits against the commission. The cities say commission members bent rules time and again to favor Wynn’s project over one by Mohegan Sun for the Suffolk Downs horse racing track in Revere. Mohegan Sun and Suffolk Downs workers also are plaintiffs in Revere’s lawsuit.

Among Boston’s many allegations are that commission members changed application rules and regulations to benefit Wynn and that Wynn representatives knew criminally suspect figures had an ownership stake in the former chemical plant site they hope to develop.

Boston recently issued 17 subpoenas to current and former state officials and others tied to the project. It alleges that former state troopers working as private investigators for Wynn may have known about the criminal ties to the property, a revelation the city says should lead Wynn to lose its license, if proven true.

Wynn, which is not a party in any of the three lawsuits, has threatened to sue Boston for defamation.

Revere also has asked the court to start the discovery process in its case. But Judge Sanders on Thursday ruled that such evidence gathering is premature.

“There are serious issues that need to be address here first,” she said.

Sanders, meanwhile, granted Somerville its request to continue its lawsuit against the gaming commission, pending the state’s review of the traffic and environmental mitigation plans for Wynn’s $1.7 billion resort casino complex for the industrial Everett waterfront across from Boston.

The three lawsuits are among a number of hurdles facing the state’s marquee casino project.

A group of Massachusetts taxpayers also have filed suit challenging Wynn’s casino project. That complaint is against Wynn and the state transit authority, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, and focuses on a controversial land deal between the two.

Wynn is one of three licensed casino operators in Massachusetts. MGM is building an $800 million resort in Springfield, and Penn National Gaming operates Plainridge Park, a recently opened slots parlor in Plainville.

http://www.salemnews.com/news/local_news/massachusetts-loses-bid-to-toss-boston-lawsuit-on-casino/article_36e369d6-17ae-501e-9683-fd5a26ce39ae.html

Lawsuits against Massachusetts Gaming Commission remain in play

Gaming Commission Chairman Stephen Crosby, is pictured a at a public hearing in West Springfield. The commission is facing lawsuits from Boston, Somerville, and Revere, among others. (DAVE ROBACK / THE REPUBLICAN FILE)

By Gintautas Dumcius
on July 09, 2015

BOSTON - A Superior Court judge on Thursday kept alive a flurry of lawsuits against the Massachusetts Gaming Commission and tied to the panel’s awarding of an Eastern Massachusetts casino license to Wynn Resorts.

The city of Boston, one of three cities suing the five-member panel of gambling regulators, alleges that the commission acted unethically and violated its own rules by giving the license to Wynn for a planned casino in neighboring Everett. The other cities make similar claims. An outside attorney hired by the city of Boston, Thomas Frongillo, says Boston was also denied “host community status,” despite the expectation that three-quarters of the Wynn casino’s traffic will go through Boston’s Charlestown neighborhood.

Earlier in the day, at a Gaming Commission meeting in South Boston, its chair Stephen Crosby defended the commission’s licensing. “Because the gaming establishment is not in Boston,” he said, when asked why Boston wasn’t designated a “host community.” “It’s right in the (state gambling) law. It’s pretty straightforward. If the gaming establishment is in a community, it’s a host community. If it isn’t, it isn’t.”

He added, “We believe we have abided by all the rules and have treated everybody fairly and have extended ourselves on behalf of many of the parties, to be sure they had a fair shot.”

The commission awarded the resort casino license to Wynn, which plans to build a $1.7 billion facility in 2014. Wynn is hoping to open the casino in 2018.

Here are several takeaways from the two-hour hearing in Suffolk Superior Court, which drew a standing-room-only crowd to watch a face-off between attorneys from the Gaming Commission; the cities of Boston, Somerville and Revere; and Mohegan Sun, which was Wynn’s rival for the license:

1. Judge Janet Sanders – who also recently handled the Partners HealthCare unsuccessful expansion bid - rejected an argument from attorneys for the Gaming Commission who said that the city of Boston’s 153-page lawsuit should be thrown out because it was too long. “The claims are meritless in addition to being too long,” said the commission’s outside attorney, David Mackey, before the judge denied the commission’s motion. The Gaming Commission is expected to take another tack in a new push to dismiss the Boston lawsuit later in July.

2. Judge Sanders encouraged the Gaming Commission to keep providing records to the plaintiffs outlining the commission’s decision to award the casino license to Wynn. The commission says it has already provided 108,000 pages of documents, but they had held some back, citing privacy and competitive casino information concerns.

3. But the subpoenas the city of Boston pushed for are on hold until the judge makes further determinations on which lawsuits move ahead. Most of the subpoenas deal with allegations of improper access to a “wiretap room” in the state attorney general’s office. The subpoenas allege that private investigators working for Wynn received access to the room. The Gaming Commission became aware of the allegations last week, when it received the subpoenas, the commission’s lawyers said. The commission’s investigations bureau is now looking into the claim. Wynn, which was not included in the city of Boston’s lawsuit against the commission, has denied the claims in the subpoenas.

4. The next big court date is in September. Judge Sanders set Sept. 22 as the day for a hearing on motions to dismiss several of the lawsuits and other legal requests. Be prepared for another couple of months of fierce fighting, through legal letters and in the press, between Boston City Hall, the Gaming Commission, and Wynn Resorts. Earlier this week, Wynn threatened to file a defamation lawsuit against the city and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh over “your campaign of falsehoods,” particularly what was included in the subpoenas. A city of Boston spokeswoman said earlier in the week Walsh stands by all the assertions city of Boston attorneys have made.

CASINOS

• Lawsuits against Massachusetts Gaming Commission remain in play
• West Springfield gets $100,000 from gambling fund; Springfield's request denied
• Gaming commission to boost MGM Springfield preservation fund
• Request to delay MGM Springfield casino to be studied by Massachusetts Gaming Commission
• Contamination found at MGM Springfield casino site

http://www.masslive.com/news/boston/index.ssf/2015/07/lawsuits_against_massachusetts.html

Casinos have good points and bad

Letter: Casinos have good points and bad

Posted May. 16, 2015 at 2:01 AM

In the early 1950s, we were having a discussion in a political science class about municipal financing. One of my fellow students was from upstate New York, and he thought that gambling would provide a lot of money. He used as his example the horse races at Saratoga. Our professor agreed that a lot of money came in then, but pointed out that Saratoga just about broke even because of the extra police needed, and also that they had to buy train and bus tickets to get the people who had lost their shirts out of town.

When one considers casinos, some of the same need for extra services applies.

At first, casinos provide large amounts of money, but less as time goes on. Perhaps fewer people are left with money to spare. (Perhaps some have realized that casinos should have a warning sign, saying, "Don't bring more money than you can afford to lose.") There are many more casinos around, all having to share the available number of gamblers.

There will be problems with traffic. We used to have friends who lived near Foxwoods. They complained for years about how traffic "ruined" their nice quiet corner of the world. They eventually moving to Utah.

If New Bedford gets a casino, I can visualize the traffic and parking problems. Hotels and motels would spring up, lots of planning will be needed to make sure they'd be in the right place. But on the other hand, if the traffic problems got bad enough, this area might actually get a railroad connection.

Kenneth S. Peirce Jr.

Fairhaven

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/article/20150516/OPINION/150519558/101230/NEWS0301

Frank Haggerty Guest

 

New Bedford Casino Cradle of Political Corruption & New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal

https://plus.google.com/110428618913389869063/posts/AuTk4fM5Aa4

"New Bedford has embarked on a series of bunco schemes of enormous consequence. The people who value intellectual honesty should not be quietly be fleeced by such mendacity, even from the government or media."

 

 

Frank Haggerty Guest

 

Ken, Building a casino on the waterfront in New Bedford behind a 50 year of hurricane barrier is not a great idea. The news media is aware of the 2014 climate change report for New Bedford harbor and has not written one word about the report. Plesase read the report and ask why the media is keeping this secret --Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Planning Study for Water Quality Infrastructure in New Bedford, Fairhaven and Acushnet

http://climate.buzzardsbay.org/download/seaplan-climate-vulnerability-new-bedford-area.pdf« less

 

 

Casino a poor fit for Somerset

Letter: Casino a poor fit for Somerset

Posted Feb. 22, 2015 @ 2:01 am

Economists and gaming researchers throughout the country know that casinos are bad economic development and a social curse. The casino industry is imploding because of exponential growth over the past decade prompted by fierce competition among multiple same-state casinos and from rival casinos in nearby states. The community that was promised millions of dollars in tax revenue from casino profits is in worse shape than before a casino came to town.

So what is it that continues to drive city councils and boards of selectmen to believe that a casino would be the saving grace that will boost their revenue-starved budgets to a treasure chest of economic wealth? Could it be the spike in crime that will accompany a casino or devaluation of property in the immediate and not so immediate area? The increase in drunk driving arrests and extra law enforcement and emergency personnel that the community will be responsible to provide? Skyrocketing judicial court costs, gambling addictions that spiral out of control within 10 miles of a casino, divorces, lost time from work, job terminations, small business closings, homelessness, child neglect, suicides? The exploitation of the elderly who the gaming industry shamelessly lures to their casinos offering cheap meals, free bus and van trips, pharmaceutical services that demand no co-payment, escape from depression and loneliness with all the flashing lights and sounds of the slot machines, meanwhile, preying on those same seniors’ social security checks, retirement funds and savings?

A casino in residential Somerset just doesn't fit. It’s bad economic development. It doesn't even begin to approach, on any level, ethical responsibility on the part the selectmen. They should have researched the negative socioeconomic impact of a casino before presenting the proposal to residents as a possible diamond in the rough.

John Tripp

Somerset

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/article/20150222/OPINION/150229878/101228/NEWS0301



Thank you, Mr. Tripp!

This is a poor fit for Somerset, a poor fit for the Commonwealth!

Predatory Gambling has no positives to offer any community.

The market in the northeast is saturated, revenues are declining with the only hope to create MORE GAMBLING ADDICTS.

Harrah's [now Caesars] determined that 90% of their profits originated from 10% of their patrons. That's GAMBLING ADDICTION! 

The revenues are not from High Rollers, rather from local low income people are you so accurately pointed out. Seniors on Social Security are targeted.

This is a sad commentary on Bad Fiscal Policy!

Don't bet the farm on Somerset casino

A community opposition group is already forming in Somerset, another dumb location for a Slot Barn!

There are 159 posts here. [at the bottom, click on
"older posts" to see more]
http://middlebororemembers.blogspot.com/search/label/Milford

Please remember: MILFORD DEFEATED THESE CLOWNS!
Milford created a template!

Mike Moran: Don't bet the farm on Somerset casino

OK, I admit it. I may have a gambling problem.

No, it's not what you think. I'm not powerless over the lure of slot machines, video poker or even Keno. You won't find me standing ahead of you at a convenience store selecting scratch tickets at sloth-like speed while you wait patiently to pay for your bread and milk. Nope, I'm not that guy.

Herald News Photo | Jack FoleyThe corner of Brayton Point Road and Wilbur Avenue from the southwest corner of the town Farm property in Somerset. The land is a mix of woods and fields. Somerset on the Move LLC is proposing to build a resort casino on the property.




By Mike Moran
Opinion Columnist Posted Feb. 11, 2015 at 4:25 PM
Updated Feb 12, 2015 at 11:09 AM

OK, I admit it. I may have a gambling problem.

No, it’s not what you think. I’m not powerless over the lure of slot machines, video poker or even Keno. You won’t find me standing ahead of you at a convenience store selecting scratch tickets at sloth-like speed while you wait patiently to pay for your bread and milk. Nope, I’m not that guy.

And table games, like blackjack and roulette, do nothing for me. In fact, I once watched silently for an hour as real gamblers played at a craps table. I walked away knowing nothing more than I did when I arrived.

I admit that I’ll lay down a couple of bucks to play Powerball when the jackpot climbs to gigantic levels. Do I expect to win? I understand that the odds are better that I will be struck by lightning while riding a unicycle up President Avenue.

So what is the nature of my gambling problem? Actually, it’s more like a casino problem. You see, like the hallucinations that appear before the eyes of an exhausted, parched desert traveler, I see casinos everywhere. Until recently, they were permanently imprinted on my mind, as politician after politician promised me that a casino in the SouthCoast would someday exist.

There was the riverboat casino the folks from Circus Circus told us would chug up and down the Taunton River. Then there was the land-based casino at Fall River’s former municipal airport. We all recall the New Bedford casino that former Gov. Bill Weld and former Mayor Rosemary Tierney said was a sure thing in 1993. It might be at the site of the municipal golf course, we were told. Then again, it might be on the waterfront.

Rem-ember the one Mayor Will Flanagan tried to create in Fall River’s reservation-biopark area? How about the casino at the site of Fall River’s New Harbour Mall? That was a great one, right? The CEO of Foxwoods even showed up at Government Center to tell us how swell it would be, until he changed his mind and started courting New Bedford. It was then that talk about a Fall River waterfront casino, possible at the failed Hess LNG site, commenced — another false alarm. We also have the Mashpee Wampanoag casino proposal in Taunton, strategically placed near the well-travelled Route 140-Route 24 interchange. And Brockton wants to come up to the plate and take a swing.

All these casinos, ready to sprout from the ground like weeds, right?

Wrong.

Now we’ve got the latest entry in the contest to create the biggest and best imaginary casino. This one, we’re told, will be nestled in a spacious tract of land off Route 103 in Somerset.

Let me ask an impolite question. Does anyone really, truly believe that a casino will be constructed on Wilbur Avenue? Have you ever travelled over the Braga Bridge into Somerset at 5 p.m. on a weekday and taken the ramp to Route 103 East? Did the sluggish crawl of the traffic make you want to get out of your car and walk to your destination? Now imagine what that trip will be like when a casino opens a quarter mile down that same road.

Before you get too concerned though, consider a few things. Somerset residents would have to vote at least three times before the first shovel enters the ground. According to Don Setters, the chairman of the Board of Selectmen, we could expect a town meeting vote on a proposed zoning change. Then there would be a vote to sell or lease the property for use as a casino. Finally, a vote on a host community agreement would take place.

Assuming all that receives voter approval, and I doubt it will, there would then be a proposal to the state Gaming Commission for a license, followed by an endless string of hearings, meetings, environmental permitting, and other bureaucratic steps.

I’m not anti-casino and never have been. But we’ve been told too many times that “the casino” was coming, and it simply hasn’t happened. And while I understand the motivation of some within Somerset’s corridors of power to consider any idea that will help make up the lost revenue from the town’s two power plants, casino talk is always a risky proposition.

A small grassroots opposition group has started to form in town, but I don’t think too many Somerset residents take the casino plan seriously — not yet. Who knows, some residents may even like the idea.

But you can bet on this: Political leaders who unfairly raise expectations that a casino is coming may be making the biggest gamble of all — one that could have a profound effect on their own political future.

http://www.tauntongazette.com/article/20150211/OPINION/150218998#150218998/?Start=1&_suid=1423921553358026376466980122576

Casino may not fit anywhere in Nassau County

January 31, 2015 2:42 PM
By LANE FILLER

During a meeting of the Carle Place Civic Association on Jan. 21, 2015, people stand in opposition to the proposed building of an OTB gaming parlor at the vacant Fortunoff site in Westbury. Photo Credit: Newsday / Thomas A. Ferrara



Maybe it’s not possible to site a slot parlor in Nassau County.

Saturday morning the Nassau OTB announced that it is folding the cards on its plan to put 1,000 video slot machines at a casino in the old Fortunoff store in Westbury. No site is perfect for gambling, but with its commercial environs, empty 200,000-square foot building and vastly underutilized parking, the site at The Source seemed to be about as good as it’s going to get.

If the shoe won’t fit there, it may not fit anywhere.


Did OTB head Joe Cairo misplay the deal? It now looks like there are two ways to go: keep everything a complete secret until the deal is entirely done, which would be kind of disreputable, or do everything out in the open and face a mountain of opposition from day one. In Westbury, Cairo trod a middle path, letting the public in on the plan once it was well underway, but not a contractually sealed deal.

Grass-roots opposition sprang up fast. Local, county and state officials from both parties followed the public quickly once the blood was in the water. And although Cairo had every law on his side, he had to give.

The OTB is run by an appointed board, and Cairo himself is a leading Republican politico. Once the deal became unpopular enough, he couldn’t close no matter how much law was on his side. The announcement that the OTB was dropping the Fortunoff plan, in fact, came a day after Cairo won a court battle against opponents looking to block the project. It was a hollow victory.

 

So while Cairo says he’s going back to the drawing board with 18-20 properties he had identified originally, it may be that Nassau County is a place where you simply can’t open a small casino.

The OTB’s Race Palace in Plainview won’t work, Cairo says, because it lacks parking and adequate entrances and exits, is too small and already faces community opposition.



Putting the machines at Belmont is not all right with the New York Racing Association and Genting, the company operating more than 5,000 machines at Aqueduct. Slots at the Nassau Coliseum complex will see vicious opposition from powers-that-be at Hofstra and in the Town of Hempstead. And the old Cerro Wire property? If residents fought a mall for decades, they likely won’t accept a casino.

 

There are certainly other locations in Nassau, empty buildings and empty parcels. But there likely aren’t any that won’t stir strong community opposition. It’s a dense county that most residents don’t want any denser. It’s a place where people care a lot about property values and “suburban lifestyle.”

The residents of Nassau County have the right to decide they don’t want a casino. Many do want the revenue it will provide in their county, just not the hassle they fear it will bring to their community.

If it can’t be sited, then the county will be deprived of an estimated $20 million per year and 200 jobs, and eventually, the OTB will likely go bankrupt as the popularity of horseracing fades, costing even more jobs and revenue.

If County Executive Edward Mangano and other politicians are going to fight the best sites, they need to be honest about the effects on either tax bills or services, or both. And taxpayers need to be honest with themselves about the cost of fighting new development and revenue sources … of all kinds.



http://www.newsday.com/opinion/columnists/lane-filler/casino-may-not-fit-anywhere-on-long-island-lane-filler-1.9888189

Garden City wants studies before video slot machines go to Fortunoff site

Friday January 16, 2015 5:57 PM By Celeste Hadrick

Garden City village, a Republican stronghold, has entered the fray over plans by Nassau’s Off-Track Betting Corp. to locate as many as 1,000 video slot machines in the former Fortunoff department store in south Westbury.
If Garden City turns against the proposed gambling parlor, the county GOP would pay attention because of the village’s many Republican voters.
But the village hasn’t...

Content Preview This content is exclusive for Newsday digital access and home delivery subscribers and Optimum Online customers.

Already registered?
Log in

Get Newsday digital access
Subscribe

Garden City village, a Republican stronghold, has entered the fray over plans by Nassau’s Off-Track Betting Corp. to locate as many as 1,000 video slot machines in the former Fortunoff department store in south Westbury.

If Garden City turns against the proposed gambling parlor, the county GOP would pay attention because of the village’s many Republican voters.

But the village hasn’t reached that point, it seems.

In a letter to Nassau’s Off-Track Betting President Joseph Cairo and state and local officials, the village this week asked for more studies before VLTs are installed in the vacant store at the Source Mall.

“The Village of Garden City is of the opinion that prior to any determination of placing a video slot machine facility . . . at the former Fortunoff Store Site . . . that there be more formal public input about the project’s desirability and detailed economic, environmental and traffic impact studies regarding the proposal,” wrote Village Administrator Ralph Suozzi on behalf of the mayor and village board.

Suozzi requested public hearings, meetings soliciting public input and completion of economic, environmental and traffic impact studies.

OTB said Friday it “looks forward to working with all elected officials that represent the communities adjacent to the proposed Video Lottery Terminal gaming facility. Rest assured that we will continue to address the issues and concerns of local residents that have arisen as a result of the possible siting of a VLT facility in a small portion of the former Fortunoff flagship store.”

A bipartisan mix of elected officials have come out against the Fortunoff site, including County Executive Edward Mangano, a Republican; Town of Hempstead Supervisor Kate Murray, a Republican; Town of North Hempstead Supervisor Judi Bosworth, a Democrat; Nassau Legis. Siela Bynoe (D-Westbury); and Westbury Mayor Peter Cavallero, a Republican.

State Sen. Jack Martins (R-Old Westbury) has suggested the mini-casino be located at the Nassau Coliseum — though others, including the Coliseum leaseholder, oppose that location.

Some Republicans say that State Sen. Kemp Hannon (R-Garden City), whose district includes the Fortunoff site, sent a letter to Cairo last week about the Fortunoff proposal. Hannon has not returned Newsday’s requests for comment for the past 10 days and his local public relations person said he could not confirm that a letter had been sent.

Mangano and Suffolk County Executive Steve Bellone had requested the state legislature approve VLT’s for Long Island as a way to increase revenues for their counties.





http://www.newsday.com/long-island/politics/spin-cycle-1.812042/garden-city-wants-studies-before-vlts-go-into-fortunoff-site-1.9816092



 

Long Island residents voice opposition to proposed casino-style gambling parlor

Published January 16, 2015

Associated Press

 

 

 

WESTBURY, N.Y. – About one thousand Long Islanders packed a meeting to oppose a plan to build a casino-style gambling parlor in Westbury.

Westbury and Carole [sic]  Place residents and about two dozen elected officials argued that the proposed project would increase traffic on Old Country Road, spur crime and bring down property values.

The site of the proposed casino in a vacant Fortunoff Building is half-mile from 1,200 homes and less than a mile from three schools.

Newsday (http://nwsdy.li/1CuY4Bh ) says Westbury Mayor Peter Cavallaro said if OTB doesn't find another site, he'll file a lawsuit.

Suggested alternate locations included the Nassau Coliseum and Belmont Park racetrack.

The Nassau OTB says it will address the community's concerns. It says the casino would create 200 jobs and generate $150 million in annual revenue.
___
Information from: Newsday, http://www.newsday.com



http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2015/01/16/long-island-residents-voice-opposition-to-proposed-casino-style-gambling-parlor/

[VIDEO ON LINK]

More than 1,000 pack Westbury school to oppose casino-style gambling parlor at Fortunoff building

Updated January 15, 2015 10:54 PM
By ROBERT BRODSKY

 

 

 

Angry Westbury and Carle Place residents and officials packed a meeting with Nassau Off-Track Betting representatives at St. Brigid / Our Lady of Hope Regional School in Westbury on Thursday, Jan. 15, 2015, to oppose a plan to build a casino in the vacant Fortunoff building. (Credit: Newsday / Chuck Fadely)

 

 

More than 1,000 furious Nassau residents packed a Westbury elementary school Thursday night to voice their opposition to a plan to build a casino-style gambling parlor at the vacant Fortunoff building at The Source mall.

Westbury and Carle Place residents filled the auditorium at St. Brigid-Our Lady of Hope Regional School, standing wall-to-wall 10 rows deep to protest the plan by the Nassau Regional Off-Track Betting Corp. Many carried signs urging OTB to "Stop the CasiNo We Will Remember In November."

The residents and more than two dozen elected officials and civic leaders argued that the proposed gaming parlor will increase traffic on Old Country Road, spur crime and cause property values to plummet. The proposed casino is a half-mile from 1,220 homes and less than a mile from three schools.

Westbury Mayor Peter Cavallaro says Fortunoff was "selected because it was thought to be the path of least resistance." He said the towns are "certainly not the path of least resistance."

Cavallaro conceded it will be an "uphill battle" to stop the project but said if OTB did not find another site, he would file a lawsuit.

Several leaders suggested moving the casino to the Nassau Coliseum. That move would face resistance from Hofstra University and a developer that is spending more than $200 million to make it a sports-and-entertainment complex.

 

Others suggested Belmont Park racetrack. OTB officials have said that idea would not be approved by the State Gaming Commission because of its proximity to Aqueduct Racetrack and its massive racino.

North Hempstead Town Supervisor Judi Bosworth called the proposed gaming site a "colossally bad idea." Hempstead Town Supervisor Kate Murray said she was "pleading and cajoling" with OTB officials to select an alternative site.



Nassau OTB general counsel Arthur Walsh said the agency would address community concerns but told the crowd that the project "was for the benefit of the whole county." The audience then shouted him down with boos and catcalls.

 

OTB announced last month it was negotiating to purchase the Fortunoff building, which closed in 2009.

A contract is expected to be finalized by month's end and the facility could open by November,

Nassau OTB president Joe Cairo said. A price for the property has not been disclosed. The site would operate 20 hours a day and house up to 1,000 video slot machines and table games. Gambling would occupy 15 percent of the 200,000-square-foot building.

OTB projects that the gaming parlor would create 200 jobs and generate $150 million in annual revenue, including $68 million for state education and $20 million for Nassau.

Westbury and Carle Place residents have aggressively criticized the plan, creating social media pages, circulating petitions and erecting lawn signs.

"We have a ton of support and the great thing is we are all voters," said John Viscusi, a Westbury resident and an organizer against the casino.

 

Cairo said earlier that fears were misstated and the project would not increase crime. "We will make every effort to satisfy the community's concerns," Cairo said. "But, I don't expect 100 percent of people to agree with us."

Cairo said OTB has no intention of moving the location. OTBs are exempt from local zoning by state law, and VLT site selection requires only the approval of the State Gaming Commission.



http://www.newsday.com/long-island/nassau/nassau-residents-pack-westbury-school-to-oppose-gambling-parlor-at-vacant-fortunoff-building-1.9813277