NO CASINO BROCKTON! JAN 28TH

No Casino in Brockton shared their event.

Sponsored · 

1st opportunity for residents of surrounding communities & Brockton to voice opinions!

28

JAN

Massachusetts Gaming Commission Public Hearing

Tomorrow 4 PM · Holbrook Junior-Senior High School, 245 S. Franklin Street, Holbrook.

by No Casino in
B

Wynn Reaches Deals With 4 Boston-Area Communities

Wynn Reaches Deals With 4 Boston-Area Communities

BOSTON (AP) — Wynn Resorts says it has signed agreements with four more Boston-area communities as it seeks to build a $1.2 billion resort-style casino in Everett.

 

The Las Vegas gambling giant announced Monday that it has reached ‘‘surrounding community’’ agreements with Cambridge and Medford and ‘‘neighboring community’’ agreements with Lynn and Melrose. The communities join Malden, which entered into a ‘‘surrounding community’’ agreement with Wynn in 2013.

 

The agreements, which can be found on the Massachusetts Gaming Commission website, include annual payments to the communities and commitments to hire local employees and use local businesses.

 

The announcement comes as the gaming commission is set to hold a public hearing May 1 on Boston’s bid to be designated a ‘‘host community’’ for Wynn’s proposed Everett casino and Mohegan Sun’s proposed casino in Revere.

 

 

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2014/04/28/wynn-reaches-deals-with-boston-area-communities/DzUfrl2S5mu2ujkiV4B6tJ/story.html

Excellent Question from the Winthrop Police Chief

Negotiating in BAD FAITH?

Winthrop vs Goliath Casino Negotiations

Exploiting your neighbors!

Suffolk Downs Neighbor‎Celeste Ribeiro Myers

Hmmm while we know where Boston stands and what they're trying to accomplish... let's check in on Winthrop, you know the home of one if not THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE STATE...

NOTE WINTHROP'S LOCATION:

Slot Barn Hearing Postponed to Another Inconvenient Time

Gaming hearing on Foxboro's surrounding community agreement for Plainville's slots parlor postponed

Posted: Wednesday, January 22, 2014

BY JIM HAND SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
The Sun Chronicle

The subject matter will be Foxboro's "surrounding community" agreement with Penn National, the applicant for the slot machines. The agreement would create a $250,000 trust fund to offset any problems that might arise in Foxboro from expanded gambling at Plainridge, which is located on Route 1 in nearby Plainville.

The proverbial pee in the snow! Who believes that's reasonable?


The commission and Plainville have conducted a number of hearings on gambling and a decision on who to award the slots license to is expected next month.


http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/gaming-hearing-on-foxboro-s-surrounding-community-agreement-for-plainville/article_3d112a2f-dff9-5437-8ca6-36968a5d2696.html

Plainville Host Community Public Hearing

Testimony
Plainville Host Community Public Hearing
January 21st, 2014

Dear Commissioners:

I write to you today to present an alternative view about the agreements struck between Penn National (Springfield Gaming and Redevelopment, LLC) and surrounding communities, particularly Foxborough. I say “alternative” because the opinions of Plainville’s selectmen, town administrator, and certain other town officials do not represent my views nor the views of many other Plainville residents.

More than a year and a half ago, Thomas Keen and I met with Joe Fernandes and his then-assistant Dave Gagnon to present our well-researched 13-page paper about what we felt needed to appear in the RFP for a Plainville gambling consultant. One of the issues we highlighted was a need to meet with our neighbors — Wrentham, North Attleborough, and Foxborough, especially — to discuss the impact of an expanded gambling facility on their borders. Both Mr. Fernandes and Mr. Gagnon dismissed the need for Plainville to consider the concerns of our neighbors, equating whatever impact might come from a casino with the impact on Plainville from Gillette Stadium and the Wrentham Outlet Mall; they were utterly dismissive of the needs of the surrounding towns because, they said, Plainville never received mitigation for the projects built in other communities. (Interestingly enough, Mr. Gagnon is now town administrator in West Bridgewater, for which he negotiated a rather comprehensive Surrounding Community Agreement with Raynham Park.)

As Selectman Rob Rose famously said when dismissing the concerns of Plainville residents about a casino in our neighborhood, “[Plainridge] almost isn’t even in Plainville.” Extrapolating from Rob’s snide remarks, it seems only reasonable that Plainville would support the efforts of its neighbors to protect themselves from the vagaries of a casino on their doorstep, especially because — due to their proximity — Foxborough and Wrentham are as likely to deal with the casino’s negative aspects of traffic, DUIs, and criminal behavior as Plainville is. Instead, the attitude of Mr. Fernandes, Ms. Soucy, and Mr. Rose toward our neighbors is to dismiss their concerns and to treat their representatives deplorably in public meetings, often with mean spirited, vindictive, and embarrassing comments.

At your October 22nd "Public Input Meeting" in Wrentham, Plainville Treasurer and Tax Collector Kathleen Parker demonstrated the ignorance and “magical thinking” prevalent among Plainville officials when it comes to the impact of a casino on our town and our neighbors towns. Speaking about the danger of drunk driving, Ms. Parker said, “... I don't remember ever hearing of a drunk driving accident coming out of Plainridge. I know we have our current Chief here, Police Chief as well as our current Fire Chief and our prior Police Chief. They would correct me if I am wrong. We have a very well-trained professional police department. We have people in the facility and we will continue to have more people in the facility if we are lucky enough to be granted this license. They are not going to let drunk drivers out onto our streets, their streets. Because not only are they our police officers, they are also our residents, if not within the town, in the neighboring towns. Their children, their neighbors are on the same streets that we'll all be using and that we have been using.”

As I pointed out in an email to Ms. Parker, “Plainridge has seen a relative handful of people in and out of their facility over the years, while the Plainridge Park Casino — should they receive the license and withstand the court challenge regarding equal protection — plans to have thousands of people there every day, for 24 hours a day, with alcohol (some of it free or cheap) served for 18 of those 24 hours. Plainville’s own gambling consultant’s report says there will most likely be an increase in both DUIs and fatalities. To think that a handful of cops can catch every drunk as he exits, or will stop every drunk driver before she leaves the town limits is simply a fantasy. To assure townspeople they have nothing to worry about is irresponsible.”

Regarding the “social ills,” Ms. Parker has faith that Plainville will be able to do what no other town in America has been able to do when expanded gambling moves in. She doesn’t think that the surrounding towns should be worried because she’s “... Thrilled to hear about the amount of money that's available for problem gambling... All of these things are addressed in the right and proper ways. We're not irresponsible in Plainville that we're going to allow any of the things to all of a sudden erupt like a volcano in our community and not have them addressed.”

In my email to her, I suggested that she might want to reconsider her “thrill” that there is money "available for problem gambling.” The money allotted to treat gamblers who are addicted to the Lottery, Keno, and horse racing is already not enough. Worse news, the amount casinos will eventually be required to pay each year toward problem gambling treatment has dropped by more than $20 million since Governor Patrick first rolled out his plans for casinos in 2007. Massachusetts legislators axed $560,000 from this fiscal year's budget for the Massachusetts Council on Compulsive Gambling, which, in turn, has put a big dent in the Council's plans to prepare for the four casinos in the commonwealth. (http://www.telegram.com/article/20130324/NEWS/103249834/0)

Even if the amount of money for treatment and prevention approached the amount necessary to treat every citizen who needs treatment, none of the monies set aside can or will be applied to the actual costs of the damage done by people struggling with gambling addiction: bankruptcies, child neglect, divorce, job loss, foreclosures, evictions, embezzlement, theft, arrests, homelessness … There are no sums set aside to feed or house families when a mother or father spends the grocery or rent money on slots, or when an elder uses her savings or her limited income on the "crack cocaine of gambling."

 

There is no money set aside to replace money lost in businesses when addicted employees resort to petty theft, when the addicted CEO loses the payroll, or to pay hospital bills resulting from domestic violence. There are no funds dedicated to help when a family member, addicted to gambling and drowning in debt, commits suicide. And, of the pittance set aside to deal with the addicted gamblers in the host communities, there are even fewer resources set aside for surrounding towns, even though none — NONE — of the impact of expanded gambling stops at the town line. To think is does is simply insane.

Ms. Parker’s thoughts on the casino — representative of the views of most town officials here in Plainville — are nothing more than wishful thinking. They see a wad of cash and they’re willing to believe anything to get it. Somehow, they have convinced themselves (or been convinced?) that Plainville will not suffer the ill effects that other towns around the world suffered when a casino moved in. Moreover, they have convinced themselves (or been convinced?) that surrounding towns won’t experience any ill effects from the casino. Worse news, they resent and belittle the efforts of our neighbors to try to protect their residents. How pathetic and sad is that?

Therefore, I urge you to disregard Plainville town officials when they challenge the right or the amount of the surrounding community agreements. They are people for whom reality and facts have little meaning. They have told themselves a fairytale, and a fairytale it shall be. Until the dragon shows up...

Respectfully submitted,

Mary-Ann Greanier

Casinos top agenda at Walsh meeting

By Andrew Ryan

| Globe staff January 13, 2014

Mayor Martin J. Walsh held his first department head meeting Monday at City Hall, an event that drew 60 to 70 commissioners and Cabinet chiefs to the Eagle Room. It was standing-room-only for the 45-minute summit, which included officials from parks, finance, police, fire, public works, and more.

“Mayor Walsh convened his first department head meeting to bring the leaders of each city department together and thank them for the tremendous work they do for the people of Boston,” Walsh spokeswoman Emilee Ellison said. “He again emphasized his open door policy, inviting everyone to bring their ideas to the table.”

Walsh has appointed a handful of his own people, but the majority of department heads and Cabinet chiefs are holdovers from the administration of Mayor Thomas M. Menino.

It was another busy day for Walsh, who acknowledged he is still getting used to the pace of his new job. He spoke to reporters in the morning after addressing a conference at the Hynes Veterans Memorial Convention Center.

“When I said the line ‘one day at a time,’ I mean it literally, one day at a time,” Walsh told reporters. “I can’t tell you what’s going to happen tomorrow, but today we have a full agenda meeting a lot of State House — State House — I mean City Hall, staff.”

The most pressing issue Monday was a filing deadline for two proposed casinos. Wynn Resorts has proposed a casino in Everett, near the Boston line. Mohegan Sun has pitched a gambling resort on the Revere side of Suffolk Downs, the racetrack that straddles the East Boston-
Revere city line.

The state gambling commission rejected Walsh’s request for an extra month to review documents to determine if Boston has grounds to assert it is a host community for one or both projects.

Both developers have invited Boston to negotiate compensation for the city as a “surrounding community.”

Under state law, host communities have far more leverage in negotiations than those designated surrounding communities, and host communities have the right to vote on casino proposals.

On Monday, Walsh decided tentatively to accept Boston’s status as a “surrounding community” to both casinos, but he reserved the right to assert host status. He reiterated that he could take his fight to court, but seemed skeptical of taking legal action.

“I don’t know if there is grounds to fight the two proposals . . . but we’re going to look into that,” Walsh said. “We spoke about it over the weekend. The grounds, some people say they are there. I just think if we go that route, it’s going to be very expensive for the city.”

Earlier in the morning, Walsh gave opening remarks at the meeting of the Professional Convention Management Association, a trade group for people who put on conventions. Walsh was preceded on stage by two men dressed as pilgrims.

“As I was walking in, I guess there was some discussion of should I speak in a Dorchester accent so people really get a feel, or should I fake it,” he said. “But I don’t have to fake it. I have the real accent, and this is it.”


http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/01/13/mayor-martin-walsh-walsh-holds-first-department-head-meeting-facing-casino-deadline/MlbuHCSwxZVQHOKPauuzEN/story.html

 

Massachusetts Gaming Commission denies Sterling petition

Massachusetts Gaming Commission denies Sterling petition

Town argues that casino would affect traffic, police

BY CHRISTINE SMITH

STERLING CORRESPONDENT

 

Town Administrator Terri Ackerman expressed surprise last week after Sterling’s petition to be designated as a “surrounding community” of a gaming facility proposed for a site on Jungle Road in Leominster was denied.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission unanimously voted to deny the town’s petition at its public meeting held in Boston on Nov. 21. At the same meeting, state officials also voted against the City of Fitchburg’s petition but granted the Town of Bolton’s.

Elaine Driscoll, director of communications for the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, said that Sterling’s “surrounding community” status was denied due to a “lack of identified impacts.”

Ackerman hesitated to make a full statement on the matter, but noted that she felt that the town had identified and documented a number of issues that Sterling officials believe would impact the town, which they had submitted to the state for review. She is currently seeking an explanation of the Commission’s decision.

Without the designation as a “surrounding community” Sterling cannot seek arbitration at the state level, forcing The Cordish Companies, also known as PPE Casino Resorts MA, LLC, the company proposing the slot facility, to pay annual mitigation fees to the town for any impact that the facility will have on the town.

It its petition to the state, the town had argued that the Sterling border’s onefourth mile proximity to the proposed slot facility on Jungle Road was significant and would mean additional traffic on town roads and place a strain on town emergency departments. However, Cordish stated that the location is on a dead-end street, with no access directly from Sterling.

The Gaming Commission had reviewed the August study by the Massachusetts Regional Planning Council, which “raised significant concerns about traffic on Route 117 in Lancaster and Bolton,” with recommendations to review the impact on both of those towns. The study made no mention of roads in Sterling.

An analysis conducted by consultants from Green International Affiliates, Inc., also reviewed by the Gaming Commission, said that traffic would most likely travel to and from the site on Interstate 190, rather than on Sterling’s town roads.

Green International noted there would be about an annual 22.5% increase, or another 2.33 million, in vehicles coming from south of the site and traveling the six-mile portion of Route 190 located within Sterling on their way to the slot parlor. Based on numbers that currently use the highway and a yearly average of 33 accidents on this stretch of road, Green International estimated the potential crashes would increase by less than one per year as a result of the increase.

Sterling officials had argued, however, that there would be negative impacts on Routes 12 and 62, as well as Chocksett and Pratts Junction roads, all of which service roads leading to the slot parlor and which are patrolled by officers of the Sterling Police Department. Town officials had also stated concern regarding Sterling’s responsibility in being first responders to accidents and incidents on I-190, which they feel will significantly increase as a result of the additional traffic flow.

Other concerns regarding the facility included the potential increases in larcenies and other crimes, reduction of property values, and a need for expanded social service programs as a result of problem gambling.

Ackerman had noted at the Board of Selectmen’s meeting on Nov. 20 that the town would continue to negotiate with Cordish, but that both parties have not reached common ground on “a lot of issues.”

The town is hoping to reach an agreement with the company for some amount of annual mitigation directly from Cordish.

Driscoll noted that a portion of revenues from the gaming facilities will be placed into a mitigation fund, which would be available for communities to tap into, “if impacts present themselves after licensing that were not originally anticipated.” She noted that towns could petition the state for these funds after preparing a clear analysis of impacts based on specific data.

Cordish received approval from voters in Leominster earlier this fall for a 125,000 square foot facility to contain 1,250 slot machines, three restaurants, and a small entertainment venue. However, Cordish still has to wait until the beginning of January, when the Gaming Commission is expected to announce which of three proposed slot parlors will receive the single state license.

The other two proposed slot parlors include locations in Raynham and Plainville.

A public hearing on the issue will be hosted by the Gaming Commission at Leominster City Hall on Dec. 3 from 4-6 p.m.  [Another 'public hearing' at a time inconvenient for most of the public]


http://www.thelandmark.com/news/2013-11-27/Sterling_News/Massachusetts_Gaming_Commission_denies_Sterling_pe.html

 

 

 

MGC Input....then sign REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL!

Repeal The Casino Deal

MGC has received very little citizen input....don't wait, do it now!

 

Kathleen Conley Norbut

Community members asked about providing input to the process. Contact the Mass Gaming Commission. Link below.

Host & Surrounding Communities 

 

Add your comments to the Massachusetts Gambling Commission and then sign the Petition to REPEAL THE CASINO DEAL!

 

We've seen what the proposals by Gambling Interests have done to communities around the Commonwealth.

Money is lavishly spent, grand promises made that will never be fulfilled and grassroots activists are unable to compete.

Once approved, projects become 'Bait & Switch,' such as Plainridge where a Mega Entertainment venue is now included. And Palmer where the proposal is not what was promised.

Taunton, Plainville, Milford and Palmer lack adequate water for the proposals.

 

Revenues and Jobs are grossly overstated and the truth is overshadowed by proponents.

[Easily disproven.] Jobs are mostly low wage, lacking wages that will eliminate taxpayer subsidies for food stamps, housing, etc.

Requisite infrastructure costs are ignored. Suffolks Downs alone will cost ALL Massachusetts taxpayers + $500 MILLION! Big Dig anyone?

All this at a time of Gambling Market Saturation and the industry's declining revenues.

Will we, as taxpayers, end up bailing out insolvent Gambling interests?

This makes no sense. Let's just be done with it!

Opponents of Predatory Gambling across the Commonwealth are gathering petition

signatures to add their voices and allow voters an opportunity to express their opposition on the ballot.

http://www.repealthecasinodeal.org/

The site recently added a new feature:

5 Signatures

Download the petition and ask your friends

and family to help put this on the ballot.

[Remember, names on a petition must all be from the same city/town. Download

another petition if you add a different community. Then just MAIL!]

Time is growing short, so speak out NOW!

It's time to protect ALL Massachusetts communities

 

Losing Pioneer Valley Forever

Andrea Emmershy

In 1927, our legislators passed an act that would change the Swift River Valley forever. By 1946, the towns of Dana, Enfield, Greenwich, and Prescott were distant memories. The way of life for the thousands of citizens of those communities was ripped out from under them when the Quabbin Reservoir was built. Businesses closed and families were torn apart as members were forced to move away from their ancestral homes.

Our leaders in Boston are again looking to western Massachusetts to solve the state’s problems.

In 2011, our legislators passed a bill that will change the Pioneer Valley forever. Only instead of our towns being encased in water, we will be flooded with cars, crime, and broken promises.

Look at a map of Massachusetts and you see a large void in the middle of the state where once there was a sleepy hamlet. If casinos are allowed in, fast-forward seven years, which is the amount of time it took to flood the valley and what will you see, a large void where Palmer used to be. Businesses will have closed; homes will be foreclosed on, families that lived here for generations will have moved on. Palmer will be unrecognizable.

As has played out in cities and towns across the country which have invited casinos into their midst ,there is an increase in crime, a drain on the school systems, an increased need for social services to combat domestic abuse, alcoholism and gambling addictions and a decrease in property values*.

As I listen to our town officials discuss the host agreement, I have to ask, where is my agreement? As a homeowner and taxpayer, where is my guarantee that my home value is going to remain solid? Where is my guarantee that my car and home insurance won’t increase with the rise in accidents and crime in the area? Where is my guarantee that my taxes will decrease? Where is my guarantee that I’ll be able to move freely through town? Where is my guarantee that I will feel safe in my community? Where is my guarantee that our children will not be negatively impacted?

Our town officials can’t guarantee those things for us, yet they feel comfortable supporting Mohegan Sun’s proposal with their promises.

Residents who are on the fence about the vote continually mention the $16 million the town is to receive as incentive to vote yes. Whether it’s $8 million, $16 million, or $26 million. How do you put a price on quality of life?

The residents of Dana, Enfield, Greenwich, and Prescott did not have a say in their future. Their fight was barely a whisper. 

 The citizens of Palmer do have a voice.

 Vote NO on November 5th

 Don’t be dazzled by the bells and whistles the casino is flashing in front of us.

The City Manager of Central City, one of the cities with legalized gambling was quoted as saying: "I'd tell anyone who was thinking of opening their community to casino gambling to have his head examined."16

For our neighbors in Monson, Warren, Brimfield, Wilbraham, Ludlow, Belchertown, and Ware please visit the Massachusetts Gaming Commission site to voice your concerns:
http://massgaming.com/news-events/requests-for-public-comments/

Join Repeal the Dean and project our state. http://www.repealthecasinodeal.org/


*sources: srpedd.org;Casino Impact on the Town of Ledyard 2001, Seneca Niagara Casino
Fiscal & Economic Impact On Niagara Falls, NY, June 2005
Gambling in California, by Roger Dunston; Economic Impacts of Gambling, library.ca.gov

Belchertown to join regional casino impact study

Belchertown to join regional casino impact study

Posted: Oct 28, 2013 9:55 PM EDTUpdated: Oct 28, 2013 10:01 PM EDT

By Cherise Leclerc - email

BELCHERTOWN, MA (WSHM) - The Belchertown select board unanimously voted to join the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission's research of how a Palmer casino would impact the region.

The regional study is going to cost more than $98,000.

The cost is being split by 12 towns, including Palmer.

The more towns that join by Friday's deadline, the less each town has to pay.

Belchertown is concerned about a population boost and increase in traffic.

Along with joining the planning commission, the select board also says they'll hire their own consultant if they need to and ask Mohegan Sun for financial help with that.

"It may not be necessary but we want to have the opportunity to be able to do that when something comes up which is not a general problem for everybody, but it's ours and we have to do it," said Bill Barnett, chairman of the Belchertown Board of Selectmen.

Palmer residents vote on whether Mohegan's plan for their town should go forward on Nov. 5.


http://www.cbs3springfield.com/story/23812185/belchertown-to-join-regional-casino-impact-study

BUDGET BREAKDOWN: Capital investment in the Parx Casino proposal

BUDGET BREAKDOWN: Capital investment in the Parx Casino proposal

By Marc Larocque

Taunton Gazette Staff Reporter

Posted Oct 28, 2013

TAUNTON —

$277.3 million: The total capital investment in the Parx Casino plan in Raynham.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission last week publicly released application documents from the three developers vying for the single slots parlor license in Massachusetts. Raynham Park LLC, a partnership between Raynham Park owner George Carney and Pennsylvania-based Greenwood Racing, hopes to win the license to build a slots parlor at the former dog track in Raynham. While application documents marked “confidential” were not made public, the 236-page application provides a basic breakdown of the proposal’s finances.

$45 million: Equity contributed by Greenwood Racing.
$11 million: Equity contributed by Carney Family LLC through transfer of land and assets to Raynham Park LLC.
$125 million: Bank financing from syndicate of lenders led by Credit Suisse.
$46.3 million: Capital generated by a year of operating a temporary slots parlor while a permanent facility is built.
More information: massgaming.com

Read more: BUDGET BREAKDOWN: Capital investment in the Parx Casino proposal - Raynham, MA - Raynham Call http://www.wickedlocal.com/raynham/news/x1745250300/BUDGET-BREAKDOWN-Capital-investment-in-the-Parx-Casino-proposal#ixzz2j6upJLia
Follow us: @WickedLocal on Twitter | 119311408344 on Facebook

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

“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.

Gaming commission sets public input meeting on slots

While the post was delayed, it highlights the failure of the Massachusetts Gambling Commission to conduct meetings at times that are convenient for residents.

NoPlainvilleRacino

In Wicked Local Wrentham: Gaming commission sets public input meeting on slots

Gaming commission sets public input meeting on slots
Wicked Local Wrentham

Posted Oct 16, 2013

WRENTHAM —

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission is hosting a local public input meeting "to facilitate public discussion" of the recently submitted slots-parlor applications, including one from Penn National for a license to operat a parlor at Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville.

The meeting will be held in Wrentham on Tuesday, Oct. 22, 4 p.m., at the Fiske Library, 110 Randall Road, Wrentham. It is one of three public meetings planned; the other two meeetings will be held in Leominser and Easton.

The purpose of these meetings, according tot he commission, is to provide community members, in both host communities and potential surrounding communities, an opportunity to provide feedback to the commission in the early stages of the commission's application evaluation process.

To speak at the meeting, or to submit written comments, community members are asked to email the commission at mgccomments@state.ma.us with the town name in the subject line. All comments received via email will be distributed to the commissioners for their review.

http://www.wickedlocal.com/norfolk/news/x825421838/Gaming-commission-sets-public-input-meeting-on-slots



 

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