Degradation, Not Jobs!

Column: Casinos and slot barns bring degradation, not jobs

Sue TuckerThe Eagle-TribuneThe Eagle TribuneWed Jul 31, 2013, 12:15 AM EDT

During my 20 years in the Massachusetts House and Senate, I listened to hundreds of hours of testimony on casinos in public hearings. I met with dozens of slot experts, both pro and con, from all over America, and I read numerous books about the gambling industry including “High Stakes: the Rising Cost of America’s Gambling Addiction” by Sam Skolnik and MIT Professor Dr. Natasha Schull’s new book, “Addiction by Design.”

I have no built-in moral bias against gambling per se. I do, however, have a built-in bias against rip-offs, and today’s gambling industry is one of the biggest rip-offs in American history. Slots are designed to make a few wealthy men even wealthier by emptying the pockets of lower income, elderly and addicted citizens.

Today, our own wonderful corner of world, the Merrimack Valley, has been thrust into this debate because of Penn National’s slot barn proposal in Tewksbury. Penn will spend millions to convince you that this is a good idea for Tewksbury and the region. I have heard it all before, and I assure you that it is not economic development. Rather it is economic and social degradation.

Casinos, and especially slot barns, degrade the local and regional economy. They do not enhance it. When local people pour their dollars down the slots they are not supporting existing or new businesses that depend on discretionary income. For Tewksbury to get its magic money, local citizens must gamble and lose hundreds of millions of dollars. Aside from the very short-term construction jobs, the actual number of jobs is always over estimated, and the wages are pathetic.

Gambling companies claim to help problem gamblers. To the contrary, they do everything possible to keep them gambling as long and as fast as possible. The industry has fought every proposal across America to minimize addiction, whether limits on ATM withdrawals or limits on free booze. Slot barns do not make money from the casual gambler who cuts his or her losses at $50. Their profits come from those who can’t stop. This is their business model, not subject to change.

Make no mistake, these facilities are not merely looking to attract current gamblers away from Connecticut. They are looking for a whole new group of slot players — your neighbors — who start out visiting once a month, and end up visiting several nights a week because they are so close to home.

Whatever deal is on the table today will change tomorrow. Casinos all over the Northeast are already heavily in debt. When the absurd market saturation begins in Massachusetts, estimated profits will head down hill and so will the promised revenue and jobs.

If children’s jewelry and toys arrive from overseas with lead content, our government bans them because of potential harm to our children. We have dozens of agencies and private organizations designed to protect consumers from harmful products.

Now, we have a product which everyone agrees will harm thousands of our neighbors, destroy families, and cause significant more theft, embezzlement and DUIs. This product is called the modern slot machine, designed with algorithms to give potential addicts the illusion of winning. Instead of controlling it, state and local governments have partnered with it and promoted it in their own delusion of “free money.” What other industry offers mitigation money as an up-front admission that it will cause problems in the community?

Every resident of Tewksbury and this region has a stake in this issue. Many communities have “just said no” because they learned quickly that the costs far outweigh the benefits. One such community, Foxboro, did considerable research and made a film titled “Preserving the Character of Foxboro.” It is worth 20 minutes of your time to Google this video and watch it on YouTube. My hope is that Tewksbury, like Foxboro and so many other communities, will look beyond the hype and smell this big rat for what it is.

Sue Tucker, a former Democratic state senator, writes from Andover.



http://www.eagletribune.com/opinion/x937527618/Column-Casinos-and-slot-barns-bring-degradation-not-jobs

 

No Eastie Casino and Yo! Revere Casino! Hmmm.....

Louis Gnerre

This was taken from the REVERE ADVOCATE JUNE 22 2012

Earlier this week, the Revere Advocate obtained a statement from the Gaming Commission relevant to the issue. It states: “General Laws chapter 23K, section 2, which is part of the law governing expanded gaming in the Commonwealth, defines a ‘host community’ as ‘a municipality in which a gaming establishment is located or in which an applicant has proposed locating a gaming establishment.’ …‘gaming establishment’ is defined in the legislation as ‘the premises approved under a gaming license which includes a gaming area and any other nongaming structure related to the gaming area and may include, but shall not be limited to, hotels, restaurants or other amenities.’ The legislation also provides that racing must continue at any facility holding a live racing license when it receives a casino license. A track for live racing, therefore, would be an essential ingredient of casino license at any facility where live racing takes place. Finally, the legislation says that ‘if a proposed gaming establishment is situated in 2 or more cities or towns, the applicant shall execute an agreement with each host community, or a joint agreement with both communities, and receive a certified and binding vote on a ballot question at an election held in each host community in favor of such a license.’”

Further: “Under those circumstances, it would appear that both Revere and East Boston would qualify as ‘host communities’ with respect to a Suffolk Downs casino license. The Commission, however, does not now have before it a formal application, site plan or other detailed information about the Suffolk Downs proposal and it has not issued any regulations interpreting the statute or setting out the application procedures. Without those, it cannot make a final determination regarding host community status or any other aspect of any proposal in any community. The Commission is now considering all of the regulations that will be needed to carry out its responsibilities, including the procedures for making final determinations on host community status if asked to do so, and will issue any necessary clarifying regulations as it moves forward. As part of the process of issuing those regulations, the Commission will provide notice to the public and an opportunity to be heard on the regulations’ content.”

Although specific details of the mitigation package will not be made public for another few weeks, money will almost certainly be set aside for increased police presence along traffic corridors to the casino site in order to maintain public safety, according to Tuttle’s statements at the meeting.

Councillor-at-Large Anthony Zambuto, who is working with the Rizzo administration and other city officials on the mitigation plan, said: “It will be a broader package than that. Every priority of the city will be addressed in some way… It covers the city’s needs and future needs. We’re going to get more than Revere’s fair share.”

Taunton signs tentative mitigation deal with Raynham Park

Taunton signs tentative mitigation deal with Raynham Park

Gerry Tuoti

Posted: 11/08/2013

The city announced Friday that it has reached a tentative agreement with Raynham Park to mitigate the impacts of a proposed slot parlor at the former dog track.

The agreement, subject to the approval of Taunton City Council, calls for the gambling facility to pay Taunton $200,000 a year in community impact fees, with the amount increasing by 2.5 percent annually after the fourth year.

“I am pleased that we have been able to reach a mitigation agreement with Raynham Park,” Mayor Thomas Hoye Jr. said. “Historically the relationship between the Carney family and the city of Taunton has been positive, with the dog track providing jobs for many of our residents. This project will breathe new life into the site and will be an employment provider to our region’s residents.”

Raynham Park owner George Carney has partnered with Pennsylvania-based Greenwood Racing in the proposal to build the Parx Raynham slot parlor.


http://m.tauntongazette.com/wkdTGazette/pm_32196/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=nfCJ9y7Z

Why a Potential Casino in Holyoke is NOT a One-Act Issue

This is so true of ANY community!

"THEY" never go away!

Protecting your community from Predatory Gambling and its adverse affects never diminishes.

Lyn Horan

Why a Potential Casino in Holyoke is NOT a One-Act Issue-
Both a casino development and the process to review casino plans eats up millions of dollars, people’s time, our public official’s time. Time that could be better spent, and should be spent in addressing the issues of education, safety, employment, housing, drug abuse and rehabilitation, healthcare, and productive types of development with long lasting benefits.

 Here’s how that happens and why casino development is somewhat unique in this:

1. The very process of reviewing casino proposals is very costly. It needs to be very extensive, as these complexes are very large and come with many inherent negative issues. It requires a close look at issues of traffic, zoning, building codes, alcohol licensing, security, over sight of pot...

ential illegal practices associate with gambling, and on and on. Many departments of a city and state government will be tied up for some length of time to get even close to an accurate assessment of a plan. And even then it is still hypothetical. This is why CFBH was concerned about a referendum vote that could open up the process of these unusually costly reviews, not because we wanted to silence voices. This casino review process has a reputation of so severely dividing a community, that even after the casino is gone, or the plan is denied, the division still lasts.
2. Mitigation – is the process for reviewing the many, many known negatives associated with casinos including increased crime, increased substance abuse, decreased property values, increased traffic, etc, then deciding how to compensate for the destruction. The very fact that we have to create a paid Massachusetts Gaming Commission, and that mitigation for this industry is expected, should be a RED Flag for this “industry”. How time and cost effective is this… to bring in an industry that you know from the beginning has massive amounts of negatives in the first place?
3. Casino developers have massive amounts of money to sink into propagandized marketing as compared to the budget of the towns they wish to develop in. So who do you think is going to win that war of persuasion and information? They can say anything, make any promises of potential jobs and revenue, and then when their promises don’t come true, they are not accountable as it is all hypothetical.
Again, all this time and money could be used in reviewing and implementing a balanced type of development that doesn’t have all the common negatives associated with it , we wouldn’t waste time and money correcting the known problems it brings and the cost of continual oversight in watching over activity of a casino. We could be using that time and money to enhance our police and fire departments, school system, streets, healthcare, entertainment, and general quality of life.See More

 

 

 

 

 

Is David Gagne Prostituting Himself?

West Bridgewater: Who'd you get in bed with?

David Gagne was best buds with Sticky Fingers Piontkowski and couldn't grovel low enough to promote Predatory Gambling and a Slot Barn in Plainville, FACTS be damned!

David Gagne was an intern ? assistant ? to Plainville Slot Barn Cheerleader Joe Fernandes, participating in negotiations, no questions from town residents allowed, no transparency permitted.

Now, David Gagne is causing trouble and challenging Raynham? Hmmmmm......doesn't anyone wonder?

Did West Bridgewater conduct their due diligence before hiring this Casino Shill?


W. Bridgewater official wants town to reach deal with Raynham Park

By Marc Larocque

Taunton Gazette Staff Reporter

Posted Oct 24, 2013

EASTON —

A public hearing about the proposed slot casino in Raynham yielded little input about the potential harmful impact the facility could have on surrounding areas, except from an West Bridgewater official who said his town would not support the gambling destination unless it reaches a fair agreement on community mitigation.

David Gagne, town administrator from West Bridgewater, told the Massachusetts Gaming Commission on Wednesday that Raynham Park should come to a fair agreement to mitigate traffic and other effects on West Bridgewater that would result from the slot casino Raynham Park hopes to build at its longtime dog track on Route 138. Otherwise, Gagne said, West Bridgewater would oppose the Raynham Park slot casino proposal, which includes the construction of a new 175,000-square-foot facility to house the slots and entertainment, along with plans for future development for retail, entertainment and a possible hotel.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission held the hearing at Oliver Ames High School in Easton, with the specific intention of receiving public input on how the project will affect surrounding communities. Raynham Park is one of three finalists vying for the sole slot parlor license provided by the state gambling legislation, which is expected to be issued by the commission by the end of the year.

The traffic analysis that Raynham Park already commissioned estimates approximately 7,008 trips per day to the facility, with 40 percent of those trips traveling through West Bridgewater, Gagne said.

“As of this point, we have not been designated a surrounding community, although the amount of traffic flowing through the town will clearly have an adverse impact,” Gagne said. “I am here to inform you, without a surrounding community designation, the town cannot be supportive of the project. However, if the town is designated a surrounding community and the town can reach an agreement that provides for the appropriate financial relief, the town will be supportive.”

Up to this point, Taunton and Easton have been given the surrounding community designation from Raynham Park, as part of their Phase II application, but West Bridgewater and other neighboring communities want that designation as well.

Gaming Commission Chairman Stephen Crosby reminded Gagne that if Raynham Park doesn’t come to a surrounding community agreement with West Bridgewater, the town has the opportunity to petition the commission, which has the authority to mediate the agreement.

Gagne said Raynham Park, with dog track owner George Carney and operating partner Greenwood Racing, is the best of the three slot applicants, which also includes a site in Plainville and another in Leominster.

“As leaders of town owe it to residents not to promote additional hardship,” Gagne said. “If the project is to be built, we owe it to residents to provide the best mitigation plan available. … The town of West Bridgewater just needs financial relief to mitigate the expected 2,800 extra cars per day that will travel through the town.”

Many supporters of Raynham Park, from Brockton, Easton and other nearby communities, spoke out in favor of George Carney and Raynham Park.

There were also members of the labor group Unite Here, urging Carney and Greenwood Racing to reach a “labor harmony agreement” to create a level playing field for workers. At this point, there is no labor harmony agreement in place as part of Raynham Park’s gaming license application.

One speaker from Unite Here said that a strong union ensures a safe working environment for women in the gambling and hospitality industry. A representative from Unite Here said they did have a positive meeting with Raynham Park owner George Carney, but that they have not heard back from his operating partner, Greenwood Racing.

Several former Raynham Park workers, including several from Easton, talked about their time at Raynham Park before layoffs resulting from a statewide ban on dog racing enacted in 2010, saying that they were able to go to college, buy their homes and achieve their dreams by saving money while working at the track. The supporters of the track said they want hundreds of jobs that were lost to come back to Raynham Park. Vendors who have worked with George Carney also spoke in his favor during the hearing, saying Carney supports other local businesses. Several speakers also attested to the Carney family staying loyal to Raynham and keeping the park open, supporting local families, even in tough times.

Charles W. Tartaglia, a friend of Carney from Easton, told the audience about how Raynham Park would be an ideal venue for boxing. As of right now, the closest venue for good boxing matches is Foxwoods or Twin River.

“Boxing here would be a boon for the whole area,” Tartaglia said.

A public hearing about the proposed slot casino in Raynham yielded little input about the potential harmful impact the facility could have on surrounding areas, except from an West Bridgewater official who said his town would not support the gambling destination unless it reaches a fair agreement on community mitigation.

David Gagne, town administrator from West Bridgewater, told the Massachusetts Gaming Commission on Wednesday that Raynham Park should come to a fair agreement to mitigate traffic and other effects on West Bridgewater that would result from the slot casino Raynham Park hopes to build at its longtime dog track on Route 138. Otherwise, Gagne said, West Bridgewater would oppose the Raynham Park slot casino proposal, which includes the construction of a new 175,000-square-foot facility to house the slots and entertainment, along with plans for future development for retail, entertainment and a possible hotel.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission held the hearing at Oliver Ames High School in Easton, with the specific intention of receiving public input on how the project will affect surrounding communities. Raynham Park is one of three finalists vying for the sole slot parlor license provided by the state gambling legislation, which is expected to be issued by the commission by the end of the year.

The traffic analysis that Raynham Park already commissioned estimates approximately 7,008 trips per day to the facility, with 40 percent of those trips traveling through West Bridgewater, Gagne said.

“As of this point, we have not been designated a surrounding community, although the amount of traffic flowing through the town will clearly have an adverse impact,” Gagne said. “I am here to inform you, without a surrounding community designation, the town cannot be supportive of the project. However, if the town is designated a surrounding community and the town can reach an agreement that provides for the appropriate financial relief, the town will be supportive.”

Up to this point, Taunton and Easton have been given the surrounding community designation from Raynham Park, as part of their Phase II application, but West Bridgewater and other neighboring communities want that designation as well.

Gaming Commission Chairman Stephen Crosby reminded Gagne that if Raynham Park doesn’t come to a surrounding community agreement with West Bridgewater, the town has the opportunity to petition the commission, which has the authority to mediate the agreement.

Gagne said Raynham Park, with dog track owner George Carney and operating partner Greenwood Racing, is the best of the three slot applicants, which also includes a site in Plainville and another in Leominster.
“As leaders of town owe it to residents not to promote additional hardship,” Gagne said. “If the project is to be built, we owe it to residents to provide the best mitigation plan available. … The town of West Bridgewater just needs financial relief to mitigate the expected 2,800 extra cars per day that will travel through the town.”
Many supporters of Raynham Park, from Brockton, Easton and other nearby communities, spoke out in favor of George Carney and Raynham Park.

There were also members of the labor group Unite Here, urging Carney and Greenwood Racing to reach a “labor harmony agreement” to create a level playing field for workers. At this point, there is no labor harmony agreement in place as part of Raynham Park’s gaming license application.

One speaker from Unite Here said that a strong union ensures a safe working environment for women in the gambling and hospitality industry. A representative from Unite Here said they did have a positive meeting with Raynham Park owner George Carney, but that they have not heard back from his operating partner, Greenwood Racing.

Several former Raynham Park workers, including several from Easton, talked about their time at Raynham Park before layoffs resulting from a statewide ban on dog racing enacted in 2010, saying that they were able to go to college, buy their homes and achieve their dreams by saving money while working at the track. The supporters of the track said they want hundreds of jobs that were lost to come back to Raynham Park. Vendors who have worked with George Carney also spoke in his favor during the hearing, saying Carney supports other local businesses. Several speakers also attested to the Carney family staying loyal to Raynham and keeping the park open, supporting local families, even in tough times.

Charles W. Tartaglia, a friend of Carney from Easton, told the audience about how Raynham Park would be an ideal venue for boxing. As of right now, the closest venue for good boxing matches is Foxwoods or Twin River.

“Boxing here would be a boon for the whole area,” Tartaglia said.

 

http://www.wickedlocal.com/raynham/features/x348802295/W-Bridgewater-official-wants-town-to-reach-deal-with-Raynham-Park?zc_p=0

Mohegan Sun Monster: Minimal Impact?

Mohegan Sun impact report: Palmer casino would lessen unemployment, benefit housing sales, and have minimal impact on roads

By Patrick Johnson, The RepublicanThe Republican
Follow on Twitter
on October 21, 2013

PALMER — Mohegan Sun Massachusetts on Monday released a report stating that a proposed $1 billion casino would have a minimal environmental and traffic impact on Palmer and surrounding communities and a positive effect on employment and housing sales.

The 36-page document, titled “Report of Impacts on Nearby Communities,” was prepared for the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority by consultants Beals and Thomas, of Southborough.

Mohegan Sun, of Connecticut, is proposing a resort casino across from the Massachusetts Turnpike interchange on Thorndike Street (Route 32).

The report is intended to take into account the regional impact of the proposed casino on surrounding communities in the areas of transportation, housing, economic development, water resources, open space protection and public safety.

Mohegan Sun is vying to build in Palmer, while MGM Resorts International hopes to build a casino in downtown Springfield. The state Gaming Commission will ultimately have to choose between the two for the one casino that is being permitted in Western Massachusetts.

The Mohegan Sun report primarily identifies neighboring communities as Belchertown, Brimfield, Ludlow, Monson, Ware, Warren and Wilbraham. It also takes into account the impact on the towns of Brookfield, Hampden, Holland, Sturbridge, Wales and West Brookfield.

“Mohegan Sun has always been a good neighbor in the regions where we operate, and we are carrying that philosophy into the surrounding communities in this region,” Mitchell Etess, chief executive officer of the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority, said in a prepared statement.

“Our discussions with neighboring communities are a critical step in pursuit of the Western Massachusetts gaming license. This report provides a baseline for determining impacts and will help facilitate an open and productive dialogue with these communities.”

The report notes there will be a “measurable but not significant” increase in traffic, but the impact on local roads would be negligible.

It projects 86 percent of all traffic to the casino would come by way of the Massachusetts Turnpike, and 74 to 80 percent of all visitors are likely to travel more than 15 miles to the casino. The casino traffic originating locally is expected to travel mostly on main roads including Routes 20, 32 and 181.

The study observed existing peak traffic conditions to be between 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. on Saturday and from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. on Sunday. Based on projections, the casino would add some 1,700 cars on the road during peak Friday and Saturday hours, and 1,500 during peak periods on Sunday.

Daily traffic totals would range from around 16,100 on Sundays, almost 20,000 on
weekdays and 23,100 on Saturday.

In the area of unemployment, the report argues that most of the casino’s permanent employee base would come from people who already live in the Pioneer Valley. As such there would be no need to build additional housing units for workers. The casino would employ about 3,150 workers, with an average salary of $41,000 per year.

“Due to the high unemployment rate in the region, it is possible that jobs will be filled by residents of Palmer and nearby communities, producing no need for additional housing,” the report notes.

Report of Impacts on Nearby Communities by Mohegan Sun casino in Palmer uploaded by Patrick Johnson

 

Report of Impacts on Nearby Communities by Mohegan Sun casino in Palmer

It also notes that while some people may move into the area to gain work at the casino, the region likely has sufficient housing vacancies to handle any increase.

The casino will produce nearly 4,000 construction jobs and another $230 million in construction materials, “some of which could be provided by local businesses," the report notes.

As for the impact on local businesses, the report indicates that hotels, restaurants and retail stores, in particular, may see an increase in business. “While it is possible that local entertainment venues may see a decrease in patronage, the overall impact on small businesses is anticipated to be positive due to the local spending from the casino, its patrons, and its employees.”

Ware Board of Selectmen Chairman Gregory A. Harder declined to comment on the report, saying he had only received his copy of the document Monday night and had not finished reading it. Selectmen are scheduled to meet Tuesday at 7 p.m. with officials from the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission to discuss the impact of the casino.

The thirteen neighboring communities that are seeking money from Mohegan Sun to mitigate negative impacts of the casino have until Nov. 1 to decide if they want to use the planning commission to serve as technical advisers on the project.

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/10/mohegan_sun-backed_impact_stud.html

Mohegan Sun-funded casino impact report criticized as unrealistic by Ware selectmen

Mohegan Sun impact report: Palmer casino would lessen unemployment, benefit housing sales, and have minimal impact on roads

Letters to the Editor: Palmer casino would pose environmental threat

Wilbraham selectmen vote to hire legal firms to negotiate with casino companies

Towns surrounding Palmer have until Nov. 1 to opt for regional mitigation approach with PVPC involving $1 billion casino proposal

PALMER, MA (WSHM) -
Mohegan Sun Massachusetts released a 36-page neighboring community impact report this week.

MOREAdditional Links

 

CBS 3 Springfield - WSHM
 

The report identifies a list of 13 surrounding communities and breaks down the regional impacts of the proposed $1 billion Palmer casino project into several categories including: transportation, housing, economic development, water resources, open space protection and public safety.

The 13 surrounding communities mentioned are Belchertown, Brimfield, Brookfield, Hampden, Holland, Ludlow, Monson, Sturbridge, Wales, Ware, Warren, West Brookfield and Wilbraham.

The report concludes that the casino would create a minimal impact environmentally and on traffic. It also says that there would be positive impacts in areas including employment and economic development.

"Every town is unique in how the casino could potentially impact it," said John Flynn, chairman of the Board of Selectmen in Hampden. "Specifically, in Hampden we are concerned about any forces that come in to our town to put stress on our infrastructure, whether it is roads, schools, public safety officials, et cetera."

Hampden is located 5.4 miles from the proposed casino. And, Flynn says the town like many other surrounding communities will eventually make a recommendation to the state's gaming commission.

"I think we need to do a little more analysis of the report, make sure that everybody has brought their thoughts to the table and then bring one cohesive document back to the gaming commission," said Flynn.

CBS 3 did reach out to several other surrounding communities where town officials said they plan to carefully evaluate the report in the coming days.

Voters in Palmer will head to the polls Nov. 5 to decide if they want a casino in their community.
The company is competing against MGM in Springfield for the sole casino license to be awarded in Western Mass.

http://www.cbs3springfield.com/story/23758247/mohegan-sun-released-neighboring-community-impact-report

Milford: Casino would harm water quality

Casino-Free Milford

Another resident with a background in environmental science and with an understanding of watersheds has cast doubt on Milford's capability of taking on the draw of a casino.

After all, WE as Milford residents, are FORCED to limit our consumption...and ALL while paying higher rates!!

http://www.milforddailynews.com/opinions/letters_to_the_editor/x1155593221/Konvalinka-Casino-would-harm-water-quality

 

 

Konvalinka: Casino would harm water quality

 

By

GateHouse News Service

Posted Oct 16, 2013

As a Milford resident for the past 32 years, I have been involved with introducing watershed education into town schools.

With my background in Environmental Education, including extra training in watershed issues, and a degree in the natural science, I was happy to live in a town that was at the head of the Charles River and had excellent water quality. This was partly because of Milford forefathers’ great planning and the protection of our main water source in Hopkinton.

Over the past several years quantity and quality of the water has deteriorated. I now have a filtration system in my home for drinking water at an additional personal financial cost to me for my water, while my water bill has escalated.

Why are we proposing a casino that will use water for 10 restaurants, plus bathroom facilities for all those expected patrons? The land that the casino is expected to cover will prevent the ability of the watershed to recharge the groundwater, thus the river and reservoir.

Last time I checked, the water company posted that the reservoir at 70 percent, while we seem to have a permanent water ban on and talk of buying water. Why are we accepting any business that will exacerbate our water quantity problems?

I believe that any casino is not in our best interest or anyone further down the Charles River.

LINDA KONVALINKA
Milford

http://www.milforddailynews.com/opinions/letters_to_the_editor/x1155593221/Konvalinka-Casino-would-harm-water-quality

Voter Registration DEADLINE TODAY!

To Vote No, You Must Be Registered! Deadline to register to vote is Wednesday at 8 p.m.! Are you registered in East Boston? Are your anti-casino neighbors? Make sure! Download materials for registration and absentee ballots here. And we know it's last minute, but at the off chance you're up... Standout in Orient Heights in the Morning Where: Orient Heights (intersection at the Heights T station) When: Wed., Oct 16th Time: 7-9 a.m. There are 20+ people already confirmed - we'd love to see you there! - No Eastie Casino

Police intimidation at a peaceful standout?

No Eastie Casino 10/15/2013 This Week: Campaign Activities in High Gear. We Need YOU! There are plenty of ways to get involved with the anti-casino movement this week: Tuesday Jeffries Point Neighborhood Association Meeting - Both No Eastie Casino and Suffolk Downs will be presenting at the monthly neighborhood meeting. Come support No Eastie Casino as we present our in-depth critique of the mitigation agreement, and bring an undecided friend! 7 p.m., Jeffries Point Yacht Club Wednesday Deadline to Register to Vote! Are you registered in East Boston? Are your anti-casino neighbors? Make sure! Download materials for registration and absentee ballots here. Volunteer Activity Night: Join us for the latest updates, connect up with your precinct captain, interact with voters, and prepare materials to share with neighbors. Sacred Heart Church (303 Paris St), 6-8 p.m. (RSVP: Nicole) Thursday Phone Banking and Precinct Work: Reach out to voters in your precinct by phone. This work is crucial ... please consider coming for an hour or two. Sacred Heart Church (303 Paris St), 6-8 p.m. (RSVP: Steve) Saturday SUPER SATURDAY! We're looking for volunteers to hit the streets with a smile and a stack of handouts and signs in Eagle Hill, Jeffries Point, Orient Heights, Maverick and the Wood Island area. Meet at Sacred Heart Church (303 Paris St), 9 a.m. (RSVP: Nicole) Sunday Day of Solidarity and Action: No Eastie Casino and Friends of East Boston join forces to publicly declare that we reject the idea of a predatory casino in our neighborhood! Details to come, but mark your calendars! Other needs: Phone banking or volunteer outreach from home - Let us bring you some call sheets so you can call folks on your own time. Call Nicole at (857) 574-0224. Data entry at the NEC HQ! Call Nicole at (857) 574-0224 to schedule a time to drop by. Flyering in the morning - Bring information around to homes of East Boston voters. (Contact: Sandra) Block and Precinct Captains - Precinct leaders still needed for several precincts. Call Nicole today if you're available! Small Business Outreach: Let our local businesses know the ways a casino will hurt them! (Contact: Sandra) Host a house party - We're still raising money so we can keep bringing our neighbors the whole story regarding casinos. Host a fundraising house party to raise funds and participation! Got an idea? Let us know! Call Nicole: (857) 574-0224. Hope to see you at one or more of these events! Mark Your Calendars for Thurs., Oct. 24: Casino Impacts Forum We're pulling together a "star-studded" lineup of experts, from our community and beyond, to discuss what our Nov. 5th decision is really about: the irreparable damage a casino would do to our historic, family- and business-oriented neighborhood. Mark your calendars and start inviting undecided friends today. 6-8 p.m., Location TBD "My sergeant told us to come down...some kind of casino protest." On Friday, while No Eastie Casino volunteers were peacefully holding signs in Maverick Square and handing out literature to commuters, several police officers arrived and began to stare down the volunteers. One officer parked his large police vehicle near our volunteers, turned on his lights and left them going -- apparently for no reason. (shown above) Our volunteers were well within their First Amendment rights to peacefully assemble, and no one was acting in a way unbefitting of our group as a whole. Several of the volunteers said they felt quite intimidated by the sudden increased police presence. As things heat up over the next couple weeks, this kind of encounter could happen again. For that reason, our own Matt Cameron, Esq., has developed a basic checklist/guide on to how to approach any future police encounters together as well as a written notice to be provided to officers if necessary. We're hoping we never have to use any of this, but better to be prepared than surprised! DOWNLOAD THE GUIDE HERE Photo by Matt Cameron on 10/11/13 In The News WATCH: Fr. Thomas Domurat of Friends of East Boston argues that building a casino is a terrible way to create good jobs in East Boston (click to watch): The Boston Herald: "Sign wars in Eastie over casino vote" Bright green pro-casino signs are plastered around East Boston and Revere urging voters to approve a $1 billion Suffolk Downs resort in a November ballot question, but conspicuously absent from the placards is the most important word in the debate: casino. "It's by design," says Celeste Myers of the group No Eastie Casino. "From the beginning they've been trying to target people's heartstrings and affinity for Suffolk Downs. They've been playing that nostalgia card for a while. We are very aware that they pull the 'casino' language out of things as much as they can." Join our Facebook page for daily updates and articles.

In This Issue

The Week's Events

Casino Forum - Oct. 24

Police Encounter Guide

In the News

Tell us How You Can Help!

FILL OUT OUR VOLUNTEER SURVEY AND TELL US HOW YOU CAN HELP!

Are You Registered to Vote?

CLICK HERE FOR VOTER REGISTRATION CLICK HERE FOR ABSENTEE BALLOT

How to Support No Eastie Casino Financially:

We're still looking for a few thousand dollars to carry us through to Nov. 5. Can you help? Donate With a Check (preferred) Make Check Payable to "No Eastie Casino" Please include your Residential Address If donating $200 or more, please include: Employer, and Occupation (see below for details) Mail to: No Eastie Casino C/O Bryan Schnittjer 742 Saratoga St. Boston, MA 02128 -OR-

CLICK HERE TO DONATE!

Order a Sign! (we deliver!)

Buttons are Here!

They're here! Come to the next event to get yours!

How Will a Casino Impact Me and My Family? Check out the new and improved Facts page on the NEC website for facts, research and news articles about the damaging impacts casinos have had on communities like ours! You can also download many of our flyers and fact sheets directly from the facts page!

Quick Links No Eastie Casino website Friends of East Boston website Join Us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter A quick and dirty rundown of why a Boston casino is a bad idea

Make Sure We Never Have a Casino as a Neighbor: Repeal the Casino Law!

Palmer hosts 2nd informational session

Palmer town manager hosts second informational session on host community agreement with Mohegan Sun Massachusetts
By Lori Stabile, The RepublicanThe Republican
on October 15, 2013

Wagering at Connecticut casinos drops in September

PALMER - What was supposed to be an informational session Tuesday night on the town's host community agreement with Mohegan Sun turned more into a platform for casino supporters and casino foes to voice their opinions.

This was the second informational session held by Town Manager Charles T. Blanchard on the host community agreement, which comes before voters on Nov. 5. Mohegan Sun, of Connecticut, is proposing a resort casino across from the Massachusetts Turnpike interchange on Thorndike Street (Route 32).

There was standing room only, and some people had to listen from the hallway.

Bondsville resident Joseph Miarecki brought up Miller Brewing Co., and how the company wanted to relocate to Palmer, but changed its mind after "little negative meetings like this."

Miarecki asked the people if they would be citing the same concerns if an IBM or General Motors wanted to relocate to town.

"I'd like to try and focus on the host community agreement," Blanchard said. "My charge was to negotiate a host community agreement and that's what we've done . . . This is the agreement that's moving forward. I'd like to keep it away from whether the casino is a good thing or a bad thing."
Michael Eagan, a member of Quaboag Valley Against Casinos, questioned Blanchard about the PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) agreement for Mohegan.

Eagan said he did some calculating of his own, using the $1 billion project figure, and said Mohegan should be paying $17.9 million in taxes to the town. Under the PILOT, the annual guaranteed mitigation payment is $13.2 million, which will increase in the sixth year by no less than 1 percent and no greater than 2 percent of the prior year's annual mitigation payment.

"I'm sick and tired of large corporations and businesses not paying their fair share of taxes," Eagan said.

Blanchard said Eagan was not presenting things correctly, as the $1 billion figure represents the overall investment. Not everything is taxable, Blanchard said.

He said that the project would only generate $9 million or $9.5 million, using the current tax rate, and said one of the reasons they started discussing a PILOT was to increase the annual mitigation number, and get closer to communities that have split tax rates for residences and businesses, like Springfield, where MGM Resorts wants to build a casino in the South End.

Palmer only has one tax rate for all property classes.

Blanchard said the Town Council would have to implement a split tax rate this year, and it would have to stay in place two years before it could be eliminated in the event Palmer did not receive the license.

Casino supporter Robert Young said a split rate would affect business owners negatively, as it would double their taxes. Young said the PILOT program is a "huge windfall" for Palmer.

Blanchard said the annual mitigation payment Mohegan is paying Palmer is $15.2 million, plus .25 percent of gross gaming revenue up to $400 million.

Eagan said later that he felt the town should be "getting a lot more money" from Mohegan.

If Mohegan wins the license, it expects to build the project within 27 months, Blanchard said. Young said the casino is a "win-win situation" for a lot of people, and said it represents progress.

Eagan asked what will happen if Mohegan's traffic plans "don't work out as they should. Who pays the additional cost?"

Blanchard said the agreement could be reopened to address any infrastructure impacts at Mohegan's cost.

Irene F. Webb said she was concerned that the mitigation money would fund only eight more police officers, and asked if they would be enough to deal with the casino issues. The casino is expected to attract 10,000 to 12,000 visitors a day, close to the entire population of Palmer.

Casino supporter James L. St. Amand said if someone had a question on the host community agreement he wanted to hear it.

"I think pretty much the people in this room have their minds made up," St. Amand said.
Blanchard told the crowd that he felt it was a good agreement, but in the end, it's their decision how they want to vote on it.

The meeting ended with a resounding round of applause.

After the meeting, Blanchard said he thought it went well, and that it was nice to hear everyone's views.

The next informational session is scheduled for Oct. 29 from 6 to 7:30 p.m. at the Town Building.

The first session held by Blanchard was dominated by the anti-casino group.

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/10/palmer_town_manager_hosts_seco.html