PRESS RELEASE
(East Boston, MA August 11, 2014) --A coalition of groups opposing Greater Boston casinos -- including No Eastie Casino, Don't Gamble on Revere, Friends of East Boston and Friends of Revere -- announced today they have called an official boycott of the Monday, August 11, Massachusetts Gaming Commission Host Community Meeting in Revere, MA.
"After months of trying to fight through an illegitimate, illegal process that has denied the people of East Boston the rule of law by denying our vote, our core groups are throwing our full weight behind the work to Repeal the Casino Deal across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts," said No Eastie Casino spokesman Matt Cameron. "We are boycotting the corrupt, illegitimate sham of a hearing at the Mass Gaming Commission on August 11."
According to the Massachusetts gaming statute passed by our legislature and signed by Governor Deval Patrick, if a proposed casino is located in two communities, both communities must vote to allow the development of that casino to enable that proposal to move forward. On November 5, 2013, 56 percent of East Boston residents voted no to a proposed casino at Suffolk Downs. That proposed casino was to be built completely in East Boston on Suffolk Downs' property -- two-thirds of which is in East Boston. The people of Revere also voted on this proposal because the land was in both towns, and people recognized that Revere offered amenities which are statutorily considered part of a casino for the purposes of designating host community status.
Legally, the casino proposal at Suffolk Downs should then have died. However, in furtherance of a corrupt process, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission allowed Mohegan Sun to collude with Suffolk Downs to create the illusion that a proposed casino along the Revere-East Boston line does not require an East Boston vote. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission joined and promoted that collusion-even extending their deadline; even now, their decision will be based on incomplete information due to the failure of the Mohegan Sun-Suffolk Downs entity to file all the necessary, updated, accurate paperwork in a timely fashion. Together, this colluding group willfully withheld information for months that the Gaming Commission later agreed would likely have proven East Boston to be a host community; they called this information--a critical clause in a lease -- "a trade secret." When the City of Boston's attorneys pursued this information, the Gaming Commission -- both supposed watch dog and enabler -- communicated with Mohegan Sun, and somehow, the questionable "trade secret" lease clause was removed from the lease. This happened five months after the Gaming Commission had said Revere could have another vote, but East Boston would not have one.
As a result of this and other demonstrated irregularities in this Region A decision process, a complaint and request for investigation of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission has been filed with the Commonwealth Inspector General's office.
Multiple East Boston residents have repeatedly attempted to speak in front of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. Meanwhile, the Gaming Commission has given first preference in testimony to elected officials. Unfortunately, although 56 percent of East Boston residents voted NO, the great majority of elected officials who have spoken at hearings have been pro-casino officials from other communities. The Gaming Commission has repeatedly willfully ignored the valid legal concerns of Mayor Marty Walsh. Mohegan Sun and Suffolk Downs have literally fed and bused in supporters to create the false semblance of much greater support for this proposal than exists on the ground. As grassroots organizations, No Eastie Casino and Don't Gamble on Revere do not have the resources to feed or bus in our supporters; furthermore, many of our supporters have jobs and families and are not able to leave work to attend meetings. Many casino supporters, on the other hand, are paid by Suffolk Downs or the City of Revere to show up at hearings as part of their work.
Multiple East Boston residents have repeatedly attempted to speak in front of the Mass Gaming Commission. Meanwhile, the Mass Gaming Commission has given first preference in testimony to elected officials. Unfortunately, although 56% of East Boston residents voted NO, the great majority of elected officials who have spoken at hearings have been pro-casino officials from other communities. The Gaming Commission has repeatedly willfully ignored the valid legal concerns of Mayor Marty Walsh. Mohegan Sun and Suffolk Downs have literally fed and bused in supporters to create the false semblance of much greater support for this proposal than exists on the ground. As a grassroots organization, No Eastie Casino does not have the resources to feed or bus in our supporters; furthermore, many of our supporters have jobs and families and are not able to leave work to attend meetings (many casino supporters are paid by Suffolk Downs or the City of Revere to show up at hearings as part of their work).
"The people of East Boston stand firm in the belief that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has allowed this illegal violation of the rule of law because the corrupt casino industry has spent millions of dollars to encourage just this outcome," Cameron said. "We also strongly believe this flagrant violation of our vote would not be happening in a wealthier community. We also strongly believe that this Commonwealth was founded on principals of justice, fairness and sharing of the common wealth. We strongly believe this is not yet an aristocracy, but retains at least some semblance of democracy -- and will continue to do so if we continue to fight for it. We believe our fellow citizens, once duly educated about this corrupt and unfair process, will stand with us in voting to repeal this flawed legislation and restore a greater measure of democracy and fairness to this Commonwealth. This state has been a leader in recognizing the rights of many -- and we know, likewise, this state's good people will recognize the right of the people of East Boston to have a vote, to vote NO, and to have that vote carry the same weight as the vote of any other commonwealth community."
On August 11, 2014, the core group members from Don't Gamble on Revere, Friends of East Boston, Friends of Revere and No Eastie Casino will be working diligently to advance the campaign to repeal this law. Should you have any questions, please contact us at the Repeal the Casino Deal headquarters in East Boston. Our work there will serve as our protest of the Mass Gaming Commission's sham hearing.
Source for this Press Release: Repeal the Casino Deal, 617-981-4177
Showing posts with label NoEastieCasino. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NoEastieCasino. Show all posts
Monday, August 11, 2014
Thursday, July 31, 2014
State Representative Candidate Celeste Ribeiro Myers Calls for Three Public Debates in East Boston
(EAST BOSTON, MA July 31, 2014) —Celeste Ribeiro Myers, candidate for Suffolk County’s State Representative seat in the First District, today invited her opponent, Rep. Carlo Basile, to participate in three public debates or forums leading up to the Nov. 4 election. In a letter to the Basile campaign Thursday, the Myers campaign called for three public debates: one focusing on development in East Boston, another chosen by the Basile campaign, and a third debate covering a variety of topics.
“Voters should know where we come down on issues affecting East Boston and have the opportunity to hear our respective visions for this community, which no doubt differ in many ways,” the letter states.
The letter also requests a meeting between representatives of each campaign to finalize debate topics and discuss possible sponsors, venues and formats, and asks the Basile campaign to respond by next Wednesday.
Myers, a lifelong East Boston resident, is known for leading the ballot question campaign group No Eastie Casino, which successfully defeated a proposal to site a casino at Suffolk Downs in East Boston on Nov. 5, 2013. (Basile opposed an area casino as a candidate in 2007 but vigorously supported casino plans in the run-up to the vote).
Earlier this month, Myers asked Basile to join her in rejecting campaign contributions from special interest groups, including lobbyists. The Basile campaign has not yet responded to the request to take the “people’s pledge.”
Myers’ robust platform includes plans to give residents more say in how Eastie develops; transportation improvements; job creation and economic development; health; and equality and inclusion for all. Check out her entire platform at www.celesteforeastboston.
Source: Steve Holt, 617-447-6519
Monday, July 28, 2014
Stand For Democracy and Don Berwick for Governor Campaigns Agree to Work Collaboratively in the Fight Against Casinos
Source Sunha Kim, (310) 710-3348, spk454@mail.harvard.edu
Leaders
from both Stand For Democracy and Don Berwick for Governor campaigns
met last week to discuss the repeal of the 2011 Expanded Gaming Act.
Both organizations have agreed to work collaboratively towards repealing
the commonwealth’s casino law and promoting Berwick’s stance as the
only candidate opposed to casinos and supporting the repeal. “We have
taken a close look at all of the gubernatorial candidates and their
stance on casinos in Massachusetts. Don Berwick’s position against
casinos is the only one in line with that of Stand For Democracy”, said
Pedro Morales, one of the founders of Stand For Democracy.
Stand
For Democracy is an organization that emanates from the successful 2013
anti-casino campaign in East Boston. “Don was inspired by the ability
of grassroots activists to take on powerful corporate interests in the
East Boston casino referendum. It is exciting to collaborate with some
of the leaders of that movement, and we look forward to working together
to promote Don’s position on this crucial issue around the state,” said
David Marsh of the Berwick campaign. A schedule of joint events will be
released shortly.
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
Boston Clergy to Mayor Walsh: ‘Protect the Vote of the People’
(Boston, MA, May 6, 2014)
May 6, 2014
Dear Mayor Walsh,
Following weekend reports
that Mayor Marty Walsh may be in direct negotiations with Mohegan Sun regarding
a proposed casino at Suffolk Downs, more than forty Boston-area clergy are
urging Mayor Walsh to uphold the “no casino” vote that took place in East
Boston on Nov. 5, 2013.
In a joint letter signed by
Protestant, Catholic, Jewish and Muslim leaders and submitted to the mayor’s
office today, the clergy expressed alarm at the ongoing “affront to the
democratic process” amid efforts to approve up to one casino in Eastern
Massachusetts, and called on Mayor Walsh to “use the full resources of the city
of Boston to protect the vote of the people.”
The letter articulates the
legal terms of the Nov. 5 vote, which included the residents of East Boston
being legally entrusted with the city’s vote by the Boston City Council, as
well as being constantly assured that the Suffolk Downs casino proposal required
a “yes” vote in both Boston and
Revere to proceed.
“The people of East Boston
voted against that proposal,” the letter continues. “Despite this vote and in
direct opposition to the will of the people, the Massachusetts Gaming
Commission allowed a proposal to go forward at Suffolk Downs.”
While there has been
solidarity around this issue among East Boston ministers since November,
critical to the present initiative is the increasing involvement of clergy
throughout Boston as a whole. The additional support from ministers across
the city is directly attributable to the ignoring of East Boston’s vote by the
Massachusetts Gaming Commission, local elected officials, and now perhaps Mayor
Walsh, says Rev. Dr. David Searles of Central Assembly of God Church in
East Boston, who assisted in writing the letter.
“There were two significant questions on the November 5
ballot, the mayoral election question and the casino question,” Searles says. “If
the casino vote did not count, then why should the mayor’s vote count? There’s simply no logic to this.”
The clergy insist their
initiative is not simply about being against
a casino, adding that they “support business development and job creation that
produces long-term economic health.” Even
still, the letter states, “a casino’s long-term negative impacts would far
outweigh the promises.”
Reports that the city may be
open to negotiating with Mohegan Sun and Suffolk Downs have increased the
clergy’s resolve. “We’re not giving up and we’re not going away,” says Trent
Sheppard, Alpha New England’s Collegiate Chaplain and an East Boston resident. “East Boston’s future is bright, and that
future – according to the will of the people – is casino-free.”
The ministers’ letter can be
read in full at www.friendsofeastboston.com and clergy signature gathering will continue unabated
throughout the week.
*****
Dear Mayor Walsh,
We appreciate your vision to strengthen local neighborhoods and to work toward unity
that we may be One Boston. As clergy in Boston we share your commitment to the city
and the desire for all people to have an opportunity to live peaceful and fruitful lives.
In September 2013 the Boston City Council entrusted the residents of East Boston to represent the entire city of Boston in a vote on a casino proposal at Suffolk Downs. The Suffolk Downs property, located in two host communities (East Boston and Revere), required a “Yes” vote in both communities to proceed.
It was clear this was never about two different proposals in East Boston or Revere, but always about one proposal at Suffolk Downs.
On November 5, 2013, the people of East Boston voted against that proposal. Despite this vote and in direct opposition to the will of the people, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission allowed a proposal to go forward at Suffolk Downs in December 2013.
We are deeply concerned by this affront to the democratic process and we stand in solidarity with the East Boston vote. We appreciate your efforts to support the November 5 vote against a casino at Suffolk Downs and we call upon you to continue to use the full resources of the city of Boston to protect the vote of the people who clearly said "No" to a casino.
We support business development and job creation that produces long-term economic health in the city. While the possibility of new jobs from the Suffolk Downs proposal is alluring at first glance, a casino’s long-term negative impacts far outweigh the promises.
A significant increase in crime rates, the doubling of gambling addictions, and the transfer of revenue from the local economy into casino coffers would harm individuals and families, and would negatively impact local businesses by effectively eliminating 1-2 jobs for every slot machine – and there will be approximately 4,000 slot machines installed at the proposed casino. These impacts would not only be felt in East Boston, but in every neighborhood throughout the city.
We join together with you to support the vitality of our neighborhoods, the unity of Boston, and Boston’s vote for a casino free community.
Sincerely,
In September 2013 the Boston City Council entrusted the residents of East Boston to represent the entire city of Boston in a vote on a casino proposal at Suffolk Downs. The Suffolk Downs property, located in two host communities (East Boston and Revere), required a “Yes” vote in both communities to proceed.
It was clear this was never about two different proposals in East Boston or Revere, but always about one proposal at Suffolk Downs.
On November 5, 2013, the people of East Boston voted against that proposal. Despite this vote and in direct opposition to the will of the people, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission allowed a proposal to go forward at Suffolk Downs in December 2013.
We are deeply concerned by this affront to the democratic process and we stand in solidarity with the East Boston vote. We appreciate your efforts to support the November 5 vote against a casino at Suffolk Downs and we call upon you to continue to use the full resources of the city of Boston to protect the vote of the people who clearly said "No" to a casino.
We support business development and job creation that produces long-term economic health in the city. While the possibility of new jobs from the Suffolk Downs proposal is alluring at first glance, a casino’s long-term negative impacts far outweigh the promises.
A significant increase in crime rates, the doubling of gambling addictions, and the transfer of revenue from the local economy into casino coffers would harm individuals and families, and would negatively impact local businesses by effectively eliminating 1-2 jobs for every slot machine – and there will be approximately 4,000 slot machines installed at the proposed casino. These impacts would not only be felt in East Boston, but in every neighborhood throughout the city.
We join together with you to support the vitality of our neighborhoods, the unity of Boston, and Boston’s vote for a casino free community.
Sincerely,
Rev. Dr. David Searles, Central Assembly of God Church, East Boston
Rev. Gordon P. Hugenberger, PhD, Park Street Congregational Church, Boston
Rev. Roberto Miranda, PhD, Congregacion Leon de Juda, Boston
Fr. Felipe Gonzales, Cathedral of the Holy Cross, Boston
Rabbi Ronne Friedman, Temple Israel, Boston
Rev. Neal Armandt, South End Neighborhood Church, Boston
Rabbi Howard Berman, Central Reform Temple, Boston
Rabbi Joseph Berman, Revere
Rev. Mark Booker, Church of the Cross, Boston
Pastor Tim Bogertman, First Congregational Church, Revere
Rev. Lynn Breitenbach, Chi Alpha Campus Ministries, Boston
Rev. Terry Burke, First Church in Jamaica Plain, Unitarian Universalist, Boston
Pastora Alicia Climaco, Iglesia Profetica Internacional Ciudad de Sion, East Boston
Rev. Dr. Gregg Detwiler, Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston
Rev. Thomas S. Domurat, Most Holy Redeemer Parish, East Boston
Rev. Michael D'Urso, Eagle Heights Church, Revere
Rev. Laura E. Everett, Executive Director, Massachusetts Council of Churches, Boston
Rev. Nick Fatato, Common Church, Boston
Imam Ismail Fenni, Yusuf Mosque, Brighton
Rev. Nicholas G. Granitsas, First Congregational Church, Revere
Dr. Douglas Hall, President, Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston
Judy Hall, Assistant to the President, Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston
Rabbi Sandi Intraub, Revere
Pastor Jowulu Jaidah, Central Assembly of God Church, East Boston
Rev. Christo A. Kamara, St. Paul's Victory Christian Assembly of God, Mattapan
Pastor Bernardo Leya, Central Assembly of God Church, East Boston
Deacon Frank McHugh, Most Holy Redeemer Parish, East Boston
Rev David C. McNeely, New England Leadership Institute, Dorchester
Rabbi Bernard H. Mehlman, Temple Israel, Boston
Rev. Dr. Roberto Miranda, Congregacion Leon de Juda, Boston
Rev. Don Nanstad, Our Saviour's Lutheran Church, East Boston
Rabbi Barbara Penzner, Temple Hillel B'nai Torah, West Roxbury
Kristopher Perkins, Associate Pastor, Park Street Church, Boston
Rev. Peter Raftery, Assembly of God, Boston
Rabbi Victor Reinstein, Nehar Shalom Community Synagogue, Boston
Rev. Israel J. Rodriguez, St. Joseph ́s Parish, Lynn
Trent Sheppard, Collegiate Chaplain, Alpha New England, East Boston
Rabbi Matthew Soffer, Temple Israel, Boston
Rev. George Szal, S.M., Immaculate Conception Parish, Revere
Rev. Wendy Vanderhart, United Church of Christ, Boston
Pastor David Michael Wenrich, Boston Harbor Community Church, Boston
Matthew Whelan, Freedom Mission International & Boston Hope, East Boston
Pastor Claudio Yeme, Iglesia Palabras de Vida, East Boston
Rev. Louis Zinnanti, Christ the Rock Church, Dorchester
Rev. Gordon P. Hugenberger, PhD, Park Street Congregational Church, Boston
Rev. Roberto Miranda, PhD, Congregacion Leon de Juda, Boston
Fr. Felipe Gonzales, Cathedral of the Holy Cross, Boston
Rabbi Ronne Friedman, Temple Israel, Boston
Rev. Neal Armandt, South End Neighborhood Church, Boston
Rabbi Howard Berman, Central Reform Temple, Boston
Rabbi Joseph Berman, Revere
Rev. Mark Booker, Church of the Cross, Boston
Pastor Tim Bogertman, First Congregational Church, Revere
Rev. Lynn Breitenbach, Chi Alpha Campus Ministries, Boston
Rev. Terry Burke, First Church in Jamaica Plain, Unitarian Universalist, Boston
Pastora Alicia Climaco, Iglesia Profetica Internacional Ciudad de Sion, East Boston
Rev. Dr. Gregg Detwiler, Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston
Rev. Thomas S. Domurat, Most Holy Redeemer Parish, East Boston
Rev. Michael D'Urso, Eagle Heights Church, Revere
Rev. Laura E. Everett, Executive Director, Massachusetts Council of Churches, Boston
Rev. Nick Fatato, Common Church, Boston
Imam Ismail Fenni, Yusuf Mosque, Brighton
Rev. Nicholas G. Granitsas, First Congregational Church, Revere
Dr. Douglas Hall, President, Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston
Judy Hall, Assistant to the President, Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston
Rabbi Sandi Intraub, Revere
Pastor Jowulu Jaidah, Central Assembly of God Church, East Boston
Rev. Christo A. Kamara, St. Paul's Victory Christian Assembly of God, Mattapan
Pastor Bernardo Leya, Central Assembly of God Church, East Boston
Deacon Frank McHugh, Most Holy Redeemer Parish, East Boston
Rev David C. McNeely, New England Leadership Institute, Dorchester
Rabbi Bernard H. Mehlman, Temple Israel, Boston
Rev. Dr. Roberto Miranda, Congregacion Leon de Juda, Boston
Rev. Don Nanstad, Our Saviour's Lutheran Church, East Boston
Rabbi Barbara Penzner, Temple Hillel B'nai Torah, West Roxbury
Kristopher Perkins, Associate Pastor, Park Street Church, Boston
Rev. Peter Raftery, Assembly of God, Boston
Rabbi Victor Reinstein, Nehar Shalom Community Synagogue, Boston
Rev. Israel J. Rodriguez, St. Joseph ́s Parish, Lynn
Trent Sheppard, Collegiate Chaplain, Alpha New England, East Boston
Rabbi Matthew Soffer, Temple Israel, Boston
Rev. George Szal, S.M., Immaculate Conception Parish, Revere
Rev. Wendy Vanderhart, United Church of Christ, Boston
Pastor David Michael Wenrich, Boston Harbor Community Church, Boston
Matthew Whelan, Freedom Mission International & Boston Hope, East Boston
Pastor Claudio Yeme, Iglesia Palabras de Vida, East Boston
Rev. Louis Zinnanti, Christ the Rock Church, Dorchester
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Revere Anti-Casino Groups Express Concerns About ‘Free And Fair’ Election On Feb. 25
(Revere, MA, February 20, 2014) – With less than one week to go until the casino referendum, Don’t Gamble on Revere and Friends of Revere express significant concern about what they describe as an “environment of fear and intimidation” that is being created in Revere surrounding the casino issue.
The casino opponents specifically point towards a Channel 5 investigative report regarding Revere City Councilor Ira Novoselsky approaching and intimidating immigrant business owners to replace anti-casino signs with pro-casino signs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D--kiwo2wz4), as well as Mayor Dan Rizzo sending multiple letters to Revere citizens on behalf of Mohegan Sun.
Joseph Catricala, spokesperson for Don’t Gamble on Revere, states, “Weekly letters paid for by Friends of Mohegan Sun are being sent out with Mayor Rizzo urging citizens to vote ‘Yes’ and claiming if citizens vote ‘No’ then they don’t support Revere. “These actions,” Catricala explains, “are creating an environment of fear and intimidation for voters and business owners within the city to ‘toe the line’ when it comes to the vote, or face the consequences.”
The casino opponents claim that what is at stake in Tuesday’s election is much larger than the ill effects of a casino. “If official intimidation is to stand as the status quo now, what will happen if Revere becomes a casino town?” asks Pastor Tim Bogertman of Revere’s First Congregational Church, a founding member of Friends of Revere. “We have called the Attorney General’s office about these issues, and they have promised to look into the matter further.”
Multiple faith leaders from Revere – including Catholic priests, Protestant pastors, a Rabbi and an Imam – led a rally at Revere’ Immaculate Conception Parish this past Sunday to encourage residents that they can vote ‘No’ on Tuesday, and to assure them that clergy and others are standing with them in their opposition to the proposed casino.
The casino opponents are also sending open letters to William Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth, and to Martha Coakley, the Attorney General, regarding their concerns and they are requesting official monitoring of the polls on the day of the vote.
Source: Joseph Catricala 781-727-6099 / dontgamblerevere@gmail.com
Timothy Bogertman 617-895-7907 / tbogertman@firstcongrevere.org
The casino opponents specifically point towards a Channel 5 investigative report regarding Revere City Councilor Ira Novoselsky approaching and intimidating immigrant business owners to replace anti-casino signs with pro-casino signs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D--kiwo2wz4), as well as Mayor Dan Rizzo sending multiple letters to Revere citizens on behalf of Mohegan Sun.
Joseph Catricala, spokesperson for Don’t Gamble on Revere, states, “Weekly letters paid for by Friends of Mohegan Sun are being sent out with Mayor Rizzo urging citizens to vote ‘Yes’ and claiming if citizens vote ‘No’ then they don’t support Revere. “These actions,” Catricala explains, “are creating an environment of fear and intimidation for voters and business owners within the city to ‘toe the line’ when it comes to the vote, or face the consequences.”
The casino opponents claim that what is at stake in Tuesday’s election is much larger than the ill effects of a casino. “If official intimidation is to stand as the status quo now, what will happen if Revere becomes a casino town?” asks Pastor Tim Bogertman of Revere’s First Congregational Church, a founding member of Friends of Revere. “We have called the Attorney General’s office about these issues, and they have promised to look into the matter further.”
Multiple faith leaders from Revere – including Catholic priests, Protestant pastors, a Rabbi and an Imam – led a rally at Revere’ Immaculate Conception Parish this past Sunday to encourage residents that they can vote ‘No’ on Tuesday, and to assure them that clergy and others are standing with them in their opposition to the proposed casino.
The casino opponents are also sending open letters to William Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth, and to Martha Coakley, the Attorney General, regarding their concerns and they are requesting official monitoring of the polls on the day of the vote.
Source: Joseph Catricala 781-727-6099 / dontgamblerevere@gmail.com
Timothy Bogertman 617-895-7907 / tbogertman@firstcongrevere.org
Thursday, November 21, 2013
Sen. Petruccelli's letter to gaming commission on the "Revere" plan
Just in to eastboston.com.
The two-page letter from state Senator Anthony Petruccelli to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission on Suffolk Downs' Revere-only proposal. Related story can be found here.
November 20, 2013
Stephen Crosby, Chairman
Massachusetts Gaming Commission
84 State Street, Suite 720
Boston, MA 02109
Dear Chairman Crosby and Commissioners:
On behalf of my constituents of the First Suffolk and Middlesex District, I write today to express my increasing concern over recent efforts by Sterling Suffolk Racecourse, LLC (“Sterling Suffolk”) to proceed with the resort casino development originally proposed for the 161-acre land parcel at Suffolk Downs in East Boston (the “Project”). In a letter to the Commission, dated November 13, 2013, Sterling Suffolk expressed their intentions to move forward with the Project despite the unsuccessful ballot question in East Boston. Indeed, Sterling Suffolk has proposed to modify the Project’s development plan so that it fits entirely within the 52-acre Revere parcel at Suffolk Downs. To do so, in my opinion, undermines the spirit and intent of the Commonwealth’s Expanded Gaming Act of 2011 (the “Gaming Act”).
When the State Legislature crafted and passed the Gaming Act, my colleagues and I carefully drafted provisions pertaining to host community agreements and the conduct of an election. M.G.L. c.23K, §15 specifically requires an applicant, as a prerequisite to filing an RFA-2 application (“Phase 2”), to receive a certified and binding vote on a ballot question at an election in the host community. (See also 205 CMR 124.00.) Also, where a proposed gaming establishment is situated in more than one community, as is the case with the Project:
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. M.G.L. c.23K, § 15(13).
Taken together, the intent of these provisions is clear. Only favorable referendum results in both host communities allow the applicant to proceed to Phase 2. That did not happen with Sterling Suffolk’s Project. Because one host community voted in the negative, the Project proposed for Suffolk Downs is dead. If Sterling Suffolk wishes to proceed with an alternative development plan on the Revere parcel, then under the terms of the Gaming Act:
[They] shall not submit a new request to the governing body within 180 days of the last election; and provided further, that a new request shall be accompanied by an agreement between the applicant and host community signed after the previous election. M.G.L. c.23K, § 15(13).
However, in their November 13th letter to the Commission, Sterling Suffolk asserted that, regardless of the November 5th election results, Revere’s host community agreement remains in effect and need only be modified to reflect a shift to Suffolk Down’s Revere parcel. Sterling Suffolk does not interpret the referendums to have been votes about the Project (and host community agreements) itself; rather they view the referendums as votes on whether Suffolk Down could be developed for a casino at all.
While it is true that Revere and East Boston voted on land use, it is also unquestionable that the host community agreements were essential to the voting process. All ballots required, and did in fact contain, “a fair, concise summary of the host community agreement.” 205 CMR 124.05. My colleagues and I in the Legislature recognized that it was imperative to ensure that Massachusetts residents in an impacted community have adequate notice of, and be well-informed about, any casino proposal prior to voting. Accordingly, the Gaming Act specifically requires a host community agreement to be made public, and that host and surrounding communities have ample opportunity to weigh the potential impacts on local businesses, traffic, jobs, as well as public safety.
Furthermore, it is false to argue that an alternative development plan on the Revere parcel is anything but a new proposal, which would require a new host community agreement and referendum under the provisions of M.G.L. c.23K, § 15(13). Any proposed project development on the Revere parcel would undoubtedly look very different from that which voters reviewed prior to November 5th. Buildings and parking lots would need to be relocated, not to mention the racetrack and stables. Such changes materially alter the Project as it was initially proposed. In effect, this undermine the Gaming Act’s requirements for transparency and notice that ensure members of the impacted communities, including myself, have adequate time to weigh the merits of a proposal.
I understand why Sterling Suffolk wishes to pursue an alternative development plan on the Revere parcel. As an organization, they’ve invested a great deal of time, effort, and money to see the Suffolk Downs Project to fruition. I, too, was disappointed that the Project failed to receive the two affirmative referendum results needed to proceed to Phase 2. I believed, and still believe, that a casino has great potential to rejuvenate communities within my District. Nevertheless, the Commission cannot allow a gaming applicant to circumvent the process required by the Gaming Act merely because the results were disappointing.
I appreciate the opportunity to state my position to the Commission, and request the Commission’s clarification on the status of Sterling Suffolk’s application. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at my office.
Sincerely,
ANTHONY PETRUCCELLI
State Senator
First Suffolk and Middlesex District
The two-page letter from state Senator Anthony Petruccelli to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission on Suffolk Downs' Revere-only proposal. Related story can be found here.
November 20, 2013
Stephen Crosby, Chairman
Massachusetts Gaming Commission
84 State Street, Suite 720
Boston, MA 02109
Dear Chairman Crosby and Commissioners:
On behalf of my constituents of the First Suffolk and Middlesex District, I write today to express my increasing concern over recent efforts by Sterling Suffolk Racecourse, LLC (“Sterling Suffolk”) to proceed with the resort casino development originally proposed for the 161-acre land parcel at Suffolk Downs in East Boston (the “Project”). In a letter to the Commission, dated November 13, 2013, Sterling Suffolk expressed their intentions to move forward with the Project despite the unsuccessful ballot question in East Boston. Indeed, Sterling Suffolk has proposed to modify the Project’s development plan so that it fits entirely within the 52-acre Revere parcel at Suffolk Downs. To do so, in my opinion, undermines the spirit and intent of the Commonwealth’s Expanded Gaming Act of 2011 (the “Gaming Act”).
When the State Legislature crafted and passed the Gaming Act, my colleagues and I carefully drafted provisions pertaining to host community agreements and the conduct of an election. M.G.L. c.23K, §15 specifically requires an applicant, as a prerequisite to filing an RFA-2 application (“Phase 2”), to receive a certified and binding vote on a ballot question at an election in the host community. (See also 205 CMR 124.00.) Also, where a proposed gaming establishment is situated in more than one community, as is the case with the Project:
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. M.G.L. c.23K, § 15(13).
Taken together, the intent of these provisions is clear. Only favorable referendum results in both host communities allow the applicant to proceed to Phase 2. That did not happen with Sterling Suffolk’s Project. Because one host community voted in the negative, the Project proposed for Suffolk Downs is dead. If Sterling Suffolk wishes to proceed with an alternative development plan on the Revere parcel, then under the terms of the Gaming Act:
[They] shall not submit a new request to the governing body within 180 days of the last election; and provided further, that a new request shall be accompanied by an agreement between the applicant and host community signed after the previous election. M.G.L. c.23K, § 15(13).
However, in their November 13th letter to the Commission, Sterling Suffolk asserted that, regardless of the November 5th election results, Revere’s host community agreement remains in effect and need only be modified to reflect a shift to Suffolk Down’s Revere parcel. Sterling Suffolk does not interpret the referendums to have been votes about the Project (and host community agreements) itself; rather they view the referendums as votes on whether Suffolk Down could be developed for a casino at all.
While it is true that Revere and East Boston voted on land use, it is also unquestionable that the host community agreements were essential to the voting process. All ballots required, and did in fact contain, “a fair, concise summary of the host community agreement.” 205 CMR 124.05. My colleagues and I in the Legislature recognized that it was imperative to ensure that Massachusetts residents in an impacted community have adequate notice of, and be well-informed about, any casino proposal prior to voting. Accordingly, the Gaming Act specifically requires a host community agreement to be made public, and that host and surrounding communities have ample opportunity to weigh the potential impacts on local businesses, traffic, jobs, as well as public safety.
Furthermore, it is false to argue that an alternative development plan on the Revere parcel is anything but a new proposal, which would require a new host community agreement and referendum under the provisions of M.G.L. c.23K, § 15(13). Any proposed project development on the Revere parcel would undoubtedly look very different from that which voters reviewed prior to November 5th. Buildings and parking lots would need to be relocated, not to mention the racetrack and stables. Such changes materially alter the Project as it was initially proposed. In effect, this undermine the Gaming Act’s requirements for transparency and notice that ensure members of the impacted communities, including myself, have adequate time to weigh the merits of a proposal.
I understand why Sterling Suffolk wishes to pursue an alternative development plan on the Revere parcel. As an organization, they’ve invested a great deal of time, effort, and money to see the Suffolk Downs Project to fruition. I, too, was disappointed that the Project failed to receive the two affirmative referendum results needed to proceed to Phase 2. I believed, and still believe, that a casino has great potential to rejuvenate communities within my District. Nevertheless, the Commission cannot allow a gaming applicant to circumvent the process required by the Gaming Act merely because the results were disappointing.
I appreciate the opportunity to state my position to the Commission, and request the Commission’s clarification on the status of Sterling Suffolk’s application. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at my office.
Sincerely,
ANTHONY PETRUCCELLI
State Senator
First Suffolk and Middlesex District
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)