(REVERE, MA - February 14, 2014) Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Muslim leaders in Revere have called upon their respective communities to gather at the sanctuary of Immaculate Conception Parish at 1 PM on Sunday, February 16, for an ecumenical prayer gathering expected to draw hundreds of Revere residents.
“This is a gathering for all people of faith who are opposed to the casino” says Tim Bogertman, Associate Pastor of First Congregational Church in Revere. “It will be a time to pray, speak, and encourage others to stand against this disastrous casino plan that will negatively impact the lives of people living here.”
Friends of Revere (www.friendsofrevere.com) – a diverse group of pastors, priests and ministers representing various traditions, denominations and congregations in Revere – have called for Sunday’s gathering because they are deeply concerned about the impact of a casino in their community, what they describe as “a direct threat to the families and children who live in Revere.”
Pastor Nely Esturban of Betel Church in Revere says, “I want peace for the city of Revere. Let me tell you why – I love my kids, I love my city, and I don’t want to bring about the destruction of my city. We don’t need a casino here.”
In conversation with hundreds of congregants and parishioners, the ministers claim the casino is far from decided in the minds of people in Revere. “I thought the casino was a done deal,” explains Father George Szal of Immaculate Conception Church, “but then I began speaking with my parishioners and more than half of them are opposed to the casino. This is not a done deal at all.”
Members of Friends of Revere continue to lead their congregations, mosques and synagogues in what has been several weeks of prayer for positive future development in Revere, and they have also been preaching about the harmful effects that a casino will have in their neighborhood. Rabbi Joseph Berman, a founding member of Friends of Revere, explains his opposition to the casino in straightforward terms, “Casinos prey on the most vulnerable members of our communities, and they increase poverty, addiction, and crime.”
“Sunday’s ecumenical prayer gathering at Immaculate Conception is a time to declare that God has something better for this town than a casino,” says Pastor Bogertman, “and all are welcome.”
Source: Tim Bogertman, tbogertman@firstcongrevere.org,
Showing posts with label Suffolk Downs Casino Proposal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Suffolk Downs Casino Proposal. Show all posts
Friday, February 14, 2014
Monday, December 9, 2013
Latest: No Eastie Casino Calls on Massachusetts Gaming Commission To Uphold Expanded Gaming Act and Declare Revere-Only Casino Illegal
Download the full PDF version of No Eastie Casino's comments
In advance of the Commission's public meeting
BOSTON, Mass., Dec. 9, 2013 - Today, No Eastie Casino, a registered municipal ballot question committee organized to stop a casino at Suffolk Downs, again registered its disapproval with a plan to push forward with a Mohegan Sun casino on the Revere side of the track's property -- despite a clear "no" from 8,513 residents of Revere and East Boston in referendums on Nov. 5.
No Eastie Casino is joined by all of East Boston's elected officials and the editors of theBoston Globe in declaring the completely new plan for a Revere gaming license advanced by former applicant Suffolk Downs and the city of Revere as an affront to the letter, spirit, and clear intent of the 2011 Expanded Gaming Act. As stated in formal comments submitted to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, No Eastie Casino demands that the City of Revere and the applicants follow the law as written. Full public confidence in the casino licensing process requires nothing less.
"We believe that public confidence stands in imminent jeopardy of irreparable harm for as long as this Commission continues to consider the gaming establishment presently proposed for development in Revere in the absence of a new host community agreement and referendum, both of which are required by law," writes Matt Cameron, No Eastie Casino's general counsel, in the group's comments to the Commission.
The comments go on to lay out a thorough case for why the Commission must deny Mohegan Sun's request to move forward with casino plans on the Suffolk Downs property in Revere without a new host community agreement and vote. Countering the narrative put forth by officials from Revere, Suffolk Downs and Mohegan Sun -- essentially that the affirmative vote on Nov. 5 was a blank check for casino anywhere in the city -- No Eastie Casino asserts that the revised casino proposal bears no resemblance to the deal Revere officials negotiated and that voters approved. Suffolk Downs is no longer an applicant for the casino
license on its property, nor is horse racing directly tied to casino operations -- two assumptions voters heard repeatedly throughout Suffolk Downs' campaign leading up to the Nov. 5 referendum.
"No one has voted on the plan that Mohegan Sun is presenting. The players, the project and the details have changed," said Celeste Myers, co-chair of No Eastie Casino. "We cannot assign votes to an entirely different project that the public has not considered."
Proof the Mohegan Sun Casino Proposal is Not What Revere Voters Approved on Nov. 5
As a supplement to its written comments, No Eastie Casino also submitted to the Commission a collection of video clips showing Revere and Suffolk Downs officials contradicting the narrative they've been telling of the casino proposal since the referendum. In one clip, dated Oct. 19, Revere Mayor Dan Rizzo is seen telling constituents that Suffolk Downs' plans called for "not one ounce" of construction within Revere city limits. Several video clips show Suffolk Downs Chief Operating Officer Chip Tuttle telling audiences prior to Nov. 5 that Suffolk Downs was the entity seeking a casino license, and "has been all along." And in another clip, Suffolk Downs co-owner Joseph O'Donnell, speaking the day the track signed its host community agreement with the City of Boston, appears to say the track would respect the decision East Boston voters make at the polls on Nov. 5.
"The community, East Boston, will make that decision," O'Donnell, the a co-owner at the track for more than 27 years, said at the City Hall press conference. "That's why they'll have an election, and that's a decision that's up to them. Far be it from me to tell them what they can do. We'll live with whatever that answer is."
Within minutes of word that East Boston had resoundingly voted down the Suffolk Downs casino plan, however, track officials were already talking to the press about plans to develop the casino on the Revere side of its property. But the law required that the proposal earn an affirmative vote in both communities to advance, and Myers said the democratic process may be at stake if the Commission chooses not to respect her neighborhood's vote.
In addition to its legal analysis of a revised Mohegan Sun casino, No Eastie Casino in its written comments to the Commission also called on Chairman Stephen Crosby to recuse himself from any further deliberations or decisions pertaining to a casino in Eastern Massachusetts. Last week, the Boston Globe reported that Crosby had waited more than 10 months to disclose a decades-long personal and business connection to the co-owner of the Everett parcel where Steve Wynn has proposed a casino. Crosby also has admitted to being a longtime acquaintance of Suffolk Downs' O'Donnell, with whom he played football at Harvard.
In calling for Crosby to recuse himself from Region A casino deliberations, the group refers to a statute in the Massachusetts General Law that prohibits even the appearance of impropriety or bias with regard to public officials.
"We believe it is imperative that Mr. Crosby comply with the terms of the conflicts law and make public a letter outlining in detail why no reasonable person can conclude that his participation meets the test of the law," No Eastie Casino's comment states. "That letter should be approved by his appointing authority, prior to his taking any further action on this matter."
The Gaming Commission will take up the issue of a Mohegan Sun casino in Revere at its meeting Tuesday, Dec. 10, at 1 p.m., in room 151 of the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center. Casino opponents from Revere and East Boston will be present at the meeting, as will spokespeople from No Eastie Casino.
In advance of the Commission's public meeting
BOSTON, Mass., Dec. 9, 2013 - Today, No Eastie Casino, a registered municipal ballot question committee organized to stop a casino at Suffolk Downs, again registered its disapproval with a plan to push forward with a Mohegan Sun casino on the Revere side of the track's property -- despite a clear "no" from 8,513 residents of Revere and East Boston in referendums on Nov. 5.
No Eastie Casino is joined by all of East Boston's elected officials and the editors of theBoston Globe in declaring the completely new plan for a Revere gaming license advanced by former applicant Suffolk Downs and the city of Revere as an affront to the letter, spirit, and clear intent of the 2011 Expanded Gaming Act. As stated in formal comments submitted to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, No Eastie Casino demands that the City of Revere and the applicants follow the law as written. Full public confidence in the casino licensing process requires nothing less.
"We believe that public confidence stands in imminent jeopardy of irreparable harm for as long as this Commission continues to consider the gaming establishment presently proposed for development in Revere in the absence of a new host community agreement and referendum, both of which are required by law," writes Matt Cameron, No Eastie Casino's general counsel, in the group's comments to the Commission.
The comments go on to lay out a thorough case for why the Commission must deny Mohegan Sun's request to move forward with casino plans on the Suffolk Downs property in Revere without a new host community agreement and vote. Countering the narrative put forth by officials from Revere, Suffolk Downs and Mohegan Sun -- essentially that the affirmative vote on Nov. 5 was a blank check for casino anywhere in the city -- No Eastie Casino asserts that the revised casino proposal bears no resemblance to the deal Revere officials negotiated and that voters approved. Suffolk Downs is no longer an applicant for the casino
license on its property, nor is horse racing directly tied to casino operations -- two assumptions voters heard repeatedly throughout Suffolk Downs' campaign leading up to the Nov. 5 referendum.
"No one has voted on the plan that Mohegan Sun is presenting. The players, the project and the details have changed," said Celeste Myers, co-chair of No Eastie Casino. "We cannot assign votes to an entirely different project that the public has not considered."
Proof the Mohegan Sun Casino Proposal is Not What Revere Voters Approved on Nov. 5
As a supplement to its written comments, No Eastie Casino also submitted to the Commission a collection of video clips showing Revere and Suffolk Downs officials contradicting the narrative they've been telling of the casino proposal since the referendum. In one clip, dated Oct. 19, Revere Mayor Dan Rizzo is seen telling constituents that Suffolk Downs' plans called for "not one ounce" of construction within Revere city limits. Several video clips show Suffolk Downs Chief Operating Officer Chip Tuttle telling audiences prior to Nov. 5 that Suffolk Downs was the entity seeking a casino license, and "has been all along." And in another clip, Suffolk Downs co-owner Joseph O'Donnell, speaking the day the track signed its host community agreement with the City of Boston, appears to say the track would respect the decision East Boston voters make at the polls on Nov. 5.
"The community, East Boston, will make that decision," O'Donnell, the a co-owner at the track for more than 27 years, said at the City Hall press conference. "That's why they'll have an election, and that's a decision that's up to them. Far be it from me to tell them what they can do. We'll live with whatever that answer is."
Within minutes of word that East Boston had resoundingly voted down the Suffolk Downs casino plan, however, track officials were already talking to the press about plans to develop the casino on the Revere side of its property. But the law required that the proposal earn an affirmative vote in both communities to advance, and Myers said the democratic process may be at stake if the Commission chooses not to respect her neighborhood's vote.
In addition to its legal analysis of a revised Mohegan Sun casino, No Eastie Casino in its written comments to the Commission also called on Chairman Stephen Crosby to recuse himself from any further deliberations or decisions pertaining to a casino in Eastern Massachusetts. Last week, the Boston Globe reported that Crosby had waited more than 10 months to disclose a decades-long personal and business connection to the co-owner of the Everett parcel where Steve Wynn has proposed a casino. Crosby also has admitted to being a longtime acquaintance of Suffolk Downs' O'Donnell, with whom he played football at Harvard.
In calling for Crosby to recuse himself from Region A casino deliberations, the group refers to a statute in the Massachusetts General Law that prohibits even the appearance of impropriety or bias with regard to public officials.
"We believe it is imperative that Mr. Crosby comply with the terms of the conflicts law and make public a letter outlining in detail why no reasonable person can conclude that his participation meets the test of the law," No Eastie Casino's comment states. "That letter should be approved by his appointing authority, prior to his taking any further action on this matter."
The Gaming Commission will take up the issue of a Mohegan Sun casino in Revere at its meeting Tuesday, Dec. 10, at 1 p.m., in room 151 of the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center. Casino opponents from Revere and East Boston will be present at the meeting, as will spokespeople from No Eastie Casino.
Monday, February 25, 2013
East Boston groups release community survey on waterfront development and casino proposal
Highlights of the Community Alliance Survey (Released February 25, 2013)
- From May 2012 through August 2012, residents from across the neighborhood distributed surveys on paper and online in English and Spanish to their neighbors, at neighborhood association meetings, at community events, and via online networks. In the end, 360 surveys from East Boston residents were collected.
- Overall, the survey found that knowledge about the waterfront projects is highest in Jeffries Point, Eagle Hill, and Orient Heights. Residents who live in Maverick Square or Central Square, as well as Latino residents, are least likely to know about any of the proposals for waterfront redevelopment.
- Support for waterfront development is high, with most residents expecting positive changes in the neighborhood once those developments are completed. However, residents are also concerned about the potential for gentrification.
- Over half of residents surveyed are opposed to the proposed casino. Only one-quarter of residents support the casino. Importantly, opposition to the casino is higher among registered voters than the general population. Opposition to the casino is wide across each section of East Boston, with the exception of Central Square.
- Most of the respondents are US-born residents, are in the working-age range, and include a largely equal representation of different income groups in the neighborhood.
- The most important difference between the population of East Boston and the residents who completed the survey is that more than half of East Boston's population is Latino but only 30% of survey respondents described themselves as Latino.
- The overwhelming majority of respondents are currently registered to vote in East Boston.
- Almost two-thirds of residents surveyed stated that they knew about at least one of the proposed waterfront development projects. However, knowledge of the waterfront projects varied considerably across the neighborhood. Knowledge of the projects is highest in Jeffries Point, Eagle Hill, and Orient Heights. Fewer than half of the residents living in Maverick Square and Central Square reported knowing about any waterfront development projects compared to 71% of the rest of the neighborhood.
- The only section of East Boston in which Latino knowledge of the waterfront proposals was similar to non-Hispanic White knowledge was in Jeffries Point. In all other sections of the neighborhood, Latinos are the least likely to know about these projects. Over 70% of Latino residents in Maverick Square and Central Square reported that they did not know about any of the proposed projects.
- Similarly, low income residents across East Boston are least likely to know about any of the waterfront development projects compared to other income groups. About half of the low income residents did not know about any of the waterfront development projects. With the exception of Jeffries Point, low and middle income residents were much less likely than high income residents to know about any of these projects.
- Most respondents have positive expectations about what the waterfront redevelopment will bring to East Boston.
- Many residents were very concerned that the developments will result in displacement of current residents, as well as loss of affordability. Many residents are concerned about how these developments will change the fabric of the community
- The overwhelming majority of residents surveyed know about the casino project. Over 50% of residents are opposed to building a casino in East Boston. Only one-quarter of residents stated that they support a casino with the rest either having no opinion or not having enough information to form an opinion. Opposition to the casino is highest among registered voters.
- Support for a casino in East Boston is highest among residents with a high school education or less.
- Residents who completed the survey expect higher crime, more traffic, more air pollution, more noise, and less parking. Over 40% of residents expect pride in the neighborhood to decline. However, residents do expect that there will be more jobs from the casino.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)