I sent the email below to my legislators and encourage you to do the same before I sent the email below to my legislators and urge you to contact yours to co-sponsor this bill before the February 4, 2011 deadline for co-sponsors.
Dear Representative Ashe and Senator Brewer:
"I hope you will add your name as a co-sponsor to the Transportation Economic Development and Ridership Act submmitted by our friend Rep. Carl Sciortino (Medford).
This bill will create a safer, more modern transportation system across the entire commonwealth by increasing public transportation ridership, fixing deteriorating roads, spurring job creation, and creating more transportation choices for consumers. I greatly appreciate your support for infrastructure improvements in my community and our region. We still have a long way to go to repair and improve our transportation systems which are not only economically vital but needed for safety.
Please contact the office of Rep. Carl Sciortino (Medford) to add your name as a co-sponsor to House docket #2840."
Showing posts with label Massachusetts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Massachusetts. Show all posts
Monday, January 31, 2011
Monday, October 11, 2010
Family Emergency Preparedness Training - no charge
On November 9th at the Monson Free Library we are offering a no-cost common sense family preparedness training to better prepare and respond to emergencies.
We will talk about pet/animal care in disasters, too. Open to all folks interested in region.
Monson Free Library, 2 High Street, Monson. 6-7:45pm....we have to be gone before 8pm!
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Final Answer: "Khazei"
Khazei for US Senate
Alan is one of the two extraordinary democratic candidates that I have considered to vote for in the primary on December 8, 2009. All four candidates are very accomplished in their own right. I have taken time to study their work, vision and proposals for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the United States.
The office of US Senate is not to be taken lightly, nor to be won handily by the best political operatives and insiders. The character, temperament, experiences, skills and vision of the candidates will influence the lives of millions.
Early in the race, I gravitated toward Congressman Capuano who is a fierce advocate for his district, the Commonwealth and progressive democratic values. As the campaigns matured and I had the privilege of having Mr. Khazei reach out to me personally I found myself listening and watching with curiosity and interest to someone with a refreshing perspective.
Mr. Khazei speaks to my life experience, our shared determination, my concerns for my family's future, and our shared experiences with volunteerism, my abhorrence of the power of special interests (lobbyists, corporations and PACs) within our political system, and a vision for a more equitable and therefore more prosperous future. His enthusiasm is contagious and it springs from the same spiritual center that in us all. There is joy in toiling when the work is for the greater good. There is fun in the chores that reap mutual benefits. There is nobility in serving family, community and others.
Please join me in voting for Alan Khazei (Democrat) US Senate, on Tuesday, December 8, 2009.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Peanuts, Popcorn!
Hey, every now and then ya just gotta have fun. So here's what I do to kick back on a Friday afternoon with the effervescent Professor Jerold Duquette on his Longmeadow Cable TV show (LCTV) "Put Up Your Duq's". Grab a snack and enjoy.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Legislators called upon to perform due diligence
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Legislators called upon to perform due diligence
(Palmer) United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts (USS Mass) calls upon the Legislature to perform due diligence with an independent commission appointed to conduct a data-driven cost-benefit analysis of legalizing slots and predatory gambling in the current global recession. In a letter distributed to Legislators today, USS Mass wrote, “Proponents of corporate casinos, racetracks and predatory gambling have spent millions of dollars from out-of-state interests lobbying legislators since Governor Patrick’s failed proposal to license three resort casinos was filed. Special interest groups have targeted the Commonwealth as a market for expanding their profits at the expense of host regions, local aid, small businesses, public safety, environment, taxpayers, individuals and families affected by the negative impacts of this industry. Wildly inflated job projections and revenues have been disseminated in the media by the corporate gambling industry, the Administration and alleged researchers funded by gambling and construction groups. The global recession has impacted revenues with casinos and racinos going bankrupt and creating economic instability. We call on you as an elected representative of the citizens and taxpayers of the Commonwealth to conduct an independent cost-benefit, data-driven analysis of expanded gambling before legalizing slots or any form of predatory gambling.”
USS Mass, President Kathleen Conley Norbut stated, “We are citizens and taxpayers of the Commonwealth who along with many of our fellow citizens do not trust the one-sided figures disseminated by lobbyists and proponents of predatory gambling.” Ms. Norbut continued, “It is clear to the average citizen that the casino train left the station ten years ago…and crashed. Special interests must be clouding the vision of legislative leadership to pursue such a reckless course when bankruptcy, lay-offs and cannibalization of small businesses by the casino industry are rampant.”
# # # #
Monday, June 8, 2009
Slots and Costs
Slots and Costs. Democrats vote to oppose slots and costs of expanded gambling, negative fiscal impacts on region.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Democrats resolve to oppose slots
Whereas the Democratic Party has a long and proud tradition of advocating for social justice, working for policies that promote the public health, and fighting to protect citizens from exploitive and predatory business practices;
And whereas modern slot machines use neuroscience-informed technology to mesmerize and entrap gamblers and to keep them playing until they have exhausted their resources ("playing to extinction");
And whereas medical research has documented the highly addictive nature of the brain's chemical reactions to slot machine stimulation;
And whereas licensing and promoting such addictive, predatory gambling technology for the purpose of raising State revenues goes against the aforementioned values and principles for which the Democratic Party has long stood, and is at odds with the ideals that underlie our Party's honorable and consistent struggle to end the deceptive and predatory lending, marketing, and pricing practices that have pushed so many families to the brink;
And whereas legalizing slot machines would erode participation in the Lottery and siphon away from local small businesses the discretionary spending on goods and services that they depend on;
And whereas the development of slot machine parlors would neither create significant new jobs, nor increase tourism in Massachusetts;
And whereas evidence from other states indicates that the long-term costs of gambling addiction -- increased substance abuse, increased crime, increased family discord and dysfunction -- outweigh the short term benefits of licenses and gambling revenues;
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Massachusetts Democratic Party, as a matter of both principle and policy, opposes the legalization of slot machines and any similar efforts to promote addictive and predatory gambling as a means of raising public revenues.
And whereas modern slot machines use neuroscience-informed technology to mesmerize and entrap gamblers and to keep them playing until they have exhausted their resources ("playing to extinction");
And whereas medical research has documented the highly addictive nature of the brain's chemical reactions to slot machine stimulation;
And whereas licensing and promoting such addictive, predatory gambling technology for the purpose of raising State revenues goes against the aforementioned values and principles for which the Democratic Party has long stood, and is at odds with the ideals that underlie our Party's honorable and consistent struggle to end the deceptive and predatory lending, marketing, and pricing practices that have pushed so many families to the brink;
And whereas legalizing slot machines would erode participation in the Lottery and siphon away from local small businesses the discretionary spending on goods and services that they depend on;
And whereas the development of slot machine parlors would neither create significant new jobs, nor increase tourism in Massachusetts;
And whereas evidence from other states indicates that the long-term costs of gambling addiction -- increased substance abuse, increased crime, increased family discord and dysfunction -- outweigh the short term benefits of licenses and gambling revenues;
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Massachusetts Democratic Party, as a matter of both principle and policy, opposes the legalization of slot machines and any similar efforts to promote addictive and predatory gambling as a means of raising public revenues.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Hear ye, hear ye!
Hello Massachusetts legislators,
Please read the Western Massachusetts Casino Task Force Mission Statement and meeting Minutes before you consider supporting class III gambling in the Commonwealth. The Pioneer Valley Planning Commission has provided technical and administrative support for our work. We are local officials, most unpaid with a single agenda to protect our communities.
Please read the Western Massachusetts Casino Task Force Mission Statement and meeting Minutes before you consider supporting class III gambling in the Commonwealth. The Pioneer Valley Planning Commission has provided technical and administrative support for our work. We are local officials, most unpaid with a single agenda to protect our communities.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Mass Commission on Status of Women
Dear Rep. Ashe and Senator Brewer:
Please support funding for the MCSW. It is devastating to see the cuts proposed in the House budget when the leadership to enact reasonable tax increases and close corporate tax loopholes is absent.
There is no leadership in continued budget cuts coupled with casinos proposals that will ultimately further depress our region as solutions to the current fiscal challenges. This is a sad, embarrassing and desperate time in the Commonwealth.
The Massachusetts House Ways and Means FY10 Budget released this week eliminated all operating funds for the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women.
Please call and urge your Representative to support the amendment to the MA House Ways & Means 2010 budget, line item 0950-0000 and restore funding for operating cost of the Commission on the Status Women.
Your legislator should contact Representative Alice Wolf at: 617.722.2810 and sign on as a supporter by NOON TODAY (Friday 4/17).
The mission of the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women is to provide a permanent, effective voice for women across Massachusetts. The Commission stands for fundamental freedoms, basic human rights and the full enjoyment of life for all women throughout their lives.
The purpose of the Commission is to advance women toward full equality in all areas of life and to promote rights and opportunities for all women. The Commission exists to provide a permanent, effective voice for women across Massachusetts.
The Commission is Empowered by legislation to:
* Study, review and report on the status of women in the Commonwealth;
* Advise executive and legislative bodies on the effect of proposed legislation on women;
* Inform leaders of business, education, health care, state and local governments and the communications media of issues pertaining to women;
* Provide referrals and serve as a resource of information on issues pertaining to women;
* Identify and recommend qualified women for positions at all levels of government;
* Promote and facilitate collaboration among local women's commissions and among women’s organizations in the state;
* Serve as a liaison between government and private interest groups concerned with issues affecting women.
Please support funding for the MCSW. It is devastating to see the cuts proposed in the House budget when the leadership to enact reasonable tax increases and close corporate tax loopholes is absent.
There is no leadership in continued budget cuts coupled with casinos proposals that will ultimately further depress our region as solutions to the current fiscal challenges. This is a sad, embarrassing and desperate time in the Commonwealth.
The Massachusetts House Ways and Means FY10 Budget released this week eliminated all operating funds for the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women.
Please call and urge your Representative to support the amendment to the MA House Ways & Means 2010 budget, line item 0950-0000 and restore funding for operating cost of the Commission on the Status Women.
Your legislator should contact Representative Alice Wolf at: 617.722.2810 and sign on as a supporter by NOON TODAY (Friday 4/17).
The mission of the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women is to provide a permanent, effective voice for women across Massachusetts. The Commission stands for fundamental freedoms, basic human rights and the full enjoyment of life for all women throughout their lives.
The purpose of the Commission is to advance women toward full equality in all areas of life and to promote rights and opportunities for all women. The Commission exists to provide a permanent, effective voice for women across Massachusetts.
The Commission is Empowered by legislation to:
* Study, review and report on the status of women in the Commonwealth;
* Advise executive and legislative bodies on the effect of proposed legislation on women;
* Inform leaders of business, education, health care, state and local governments and the communications media of issues pertaining to women;
* Provide referrals and serve as a resource of information on issues pertaining to women;
* Identify and recommend qualified women for positions at all levels of government;
* Promote and facilitate collaboration among local women's commissions and among women’s organizations in the state;
* Serve as a liaison between government and private interest groups concerned with issues affecting women.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
The Crappification Plan
A very sad day for a Constitutional officer and the Commonwealth to exhibit the nonsense of proposing slot parlors to bail Massachusetts from it's financial woes. When Treasurer Cahill first publicized his support for slots in the Commonwealth it was allegedly to be in-front of the inevitable-not, Indian casinos coming to Massachusetts. The Carcieri ruling has catapulted that myth into space. Now slot parlors, yikes.
The Spectrum Gaming report commissioned by the Governor and written by pro-casino business experts denounces racinos and slots without a destination resort. Few jobs created, money drained from the immediate economy and predatory gambling being the sole business product. The report further details the negative fiscal impacts of a casino upon abutting communities with the Town of Monson used as a model. I wrote the essay that was published in the Spectrum Gaming report analyzing potential impacts upon the school district should a class III casino be sited in Palmer. Class III destination resort casinos with all their glitter are not sound public or fiscal policy. Slot parlors are just an embarrassment.
The Spectrum Gaming report commissioned by the Governor and written by pro-casino business experts denounces racinos and slots without a destination resort. Few jobs created, money drained from the immediate economy and predatory gambling being the sole business product. The report further details the negative fiscal impacts of a casino upon abutting communities with the Town of Monson used as a model. I wrote the essay that was published in the Spectrum Gaming report analyzing potential impacts upon the school district should a class III casino be sited in Palmer. Class III destination resort casinos with all their glitter are not sound public or fiscal policy. Slot parlors are just an embarrassment.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Infrastructure, Transporation, Taxes and casinos
I would like to share a letter from Lt. Governor Tim Murray with you. We have difficult decisions and choices to make at a challenging time. I commend the Governor and Lt. Governor for discussing the facts of the failing infrastructure in the Commonwealth. I would rather pay a tax on fossil fuels to improve infrastructure than live with the costs of slots for eternity.
Here is what the LG has to say:
Dear Friends,
Here is what the LG has to say:
Dear Friends,I wanted to write to you personally about the transportation reform package the governor announced last Friday, because I believe it is important that my friends and supporters consider the details of the plan and its potential impact on our economy.
We have some hard choices to make, and in that spirit I look to the example of one of my favorite presidents, Harry Truman, who was famous for “The Buck Stops Here” sign on his desk. One thing I hope never to do is pass the buck. The worst thing I could do would be to pretend the problems on our roads and bridges aren’t real. But the fact is, our transportation system is the backbone of our economy, and we can’t let it continue to degrade into ruins. For Massachusetts to get back on the road to recovery, we have to make sure our roads are passable, our bridges are safe, and that we can sustain that infrastructure over the long term.
Investing in our roads, rails and bridges will create jobs by stimulating construction, and it will help grow our economy in the long term, by making sure we have a safe and sustainable transportation network.
Many of the headlines and sound bites of recent days have focused on the 19 cents per gallon increase in the gas tax we proposed to help pay for this program, and I understand that. Taxes are newsworthy,but the plan is comprehensive, and includes major reforms that are sorely needed. It’s not just about the gas tax.
Our administration’s proposal would consolidate transportation management under one integrated executive office. We would abolish the Turnpike Authority and create a single department to handle all of the state’s highways, bridges and tunnels. We would eliminate the excessive pension loopholes that allow certain people to cash in at the taxpayers’ expense. We would create an Office of Performance Management to report to the public on the effectiveness of our transportation spending. And we would enact the reforms proposed by the Transportation Finance Commission, a bi-partisan group that took a hard look at our failing system and made many clear-minded suggestions. (Click here to read their report.)
This package of reforms will save billions of taxpayer dollars over time, and cut the state transportation payroll by about 300 jobs through efficiencies realized by consolidating overlapping functions. But even these reforms won’t free up enough money to make the desperately needed investments required in our infrastructure all across this state—to do that will require some new revenue and I believe that the gas tax is the fairest way to achieve that.
No one likes to pay more in taxes, and the governor and I would not ask people to pay more unless we thought it was necessary. I believe, however, that the people of Massachusetts are fundamentally fair-minded and will take the time to look past the headlines and think about the real issues at stake here.
That’s what civic engagement and informed democracy is all about. I believe that when government is honest with the people it serves, that’s the first step on the road to consensus and solution, even for very difficult issues.
Unfortunately, when it comes to our transportation system, the Big Dig, the MBTA and the Turnpike, honesty has not always been part of the debate. In fact, this Commonwealth has been left with a legacy of debt and denial by prior administrations unwilling to deal with the reality of crumbling roads and bridges, bloated and counterproductive bureaucracies, and the fiscal shell games they used to hide the problems.
That’s not how the governor and I do business. I believe that if we have the will to make these reforms and invest in our roads, bridges and public transportation systems, then we will position Massachusetts for long-term economic growth. But we can’t do it for free, or by running up more debt to burden future generations. We have to pay for it.
If you haven’t already done so, please take the time to learn all about our transportation proposal (click here to read all the details.) When you do, I hope you will agree that it makes the most sense, given the realties we face.
As always, I look forward to your thoughts and comments about this, so feel free to email me directly at LtGovOffice@state.ma.us with any ideas or concerns you have. By working together, I know we can make progress.
Thanks,
Tim
We have some hard choices to make, and in that spirit I look to the example of one of my favorite presidents, Harry Truman, who was famous for “The Buck Stops Here” sign on his desk. One thing I hope never to do is pass the buck. The worst thing I could do would be to pretend the problems on our roads and bridges aren’t real. But the fact is, our transportation system is the backbone of our economy, and we can’t let it continue to degrade into ruins. For Massachusetts to get back on the road to recovery, we have to make sure our roads are passable, our bridges are safe, and that we can sustain that infrastructure over the long term.
Investing in our roads, rails and bridges will create jobs by stimulating construction, and it will help grow our economy in the long term, by making sure we have a safe and sustainable transportation network.
Many of the headlines and sound bites of recent days have focused on the 19 cents per gallon increase in the gas tax we proposed to help pay for this program, and I understand that. Taxes are newsworthy,but the plan is comprehensive, and includes major reforms that are sorely needed. It’s not just about the gas tax.
Our administration’s proposal would consolidate transportation management under one integrated executive office. We would abolish the Turnpike Authority and create a single department to handle all of the state’s highways, bridges and tunnels. We would eliminate the excessive pension loopholes that allow certain people to cash in at the taxpayers’ expense. We would create an Office of Performance Management to report to the public on the effectiveness of our transportation spending. And we would enact the reforms proposed by the Transportation Finance Commission, a bi-partisan group that took a hard look at our failing system and made many clear-minded suggestions. (Click here to read their report.)
This package of reforms will save billions of taxpayer dollars over time, and cut the state transportation payroll by about 300 jobs through efficiencies realized by consolidating overlapping functions. But even these reforms won’t free up enough money to make the desperately needed investments required in our infrastructure all across this state—to do that will require some new revenue and I believe that the gas tax is the fairest way to achieve that.
No one likes to pay more in taxes, and the governor and I would not ask people to pay more unless we thought it was necessary. I believe, however, that the people of Massachusetts are fundamentally fair-minded and will take the time to look past the headlines and think about the real issues at stake here.
That’s what civic engagement and informed democracy is all about. I believe that when government is honest with the people it serves, that’s the first step on the road to consensus and solution, even for very difficult issues.
Unfortunately, when it comes to our transportation system, the Big Dig, the MBTA and the Turnpike, honesty has not always been part of the debate. In fact, this Commonwealth has been left with a legacy of debt and denial by prior administrations unwilling to deal with the reality of crumbling roads and bridges, bloated and counterproductive bureaucracies, and the fiscal shell games they used to hide the problems.
That’s not how the governor and I do business. I believe that if we have the will to make these reforms and invest in our roads, bridges and public transportation systems, then we will position Massachusetts for long-term economic growth. But we can’t do it for free, or by running up more debt to burden future generations. We have to pay for it.
If you haven’t already done so, please take the time to learn all about our transportation proposal (click here to read all the details.) When you do, I hope you will agree that it makes the most sense, given the realties we face.
As always, I look forward to your thoughts and comments about this, so feel free to email me directly at LtGovOffice@state.ma.us with any ideas or concerns you have. By working together, I know we can make progress.
Thanks,
Tim
Friday, August 15, 2008
Casino Study cites Monson
Casino Study cites Monson.
"I think this report is a starting point. ... It showed that the administration's numbers are off," Selectman Kathleen C. Norbut said this week. "They did the work the administration should have done prior to submitting the legislation."
Friday, August 8, 2008
Monson (or your town)
The letter below is what I drafted and submitted to Spectrum Gaming for consideration in the report to the Administration on the impacts of a typical abutting community to a potential casino site. Please note the Spectrum Gaming report that clearly articulates that the tax burden on abutting communities is a major spoke in the vehicle for transferring money to state coffers and casino owner/investors. Is this the public policy the Commonwealth supports?
I came into the world in Massachusetts in the 60's, there was idealism, hope and a belief that all Americans and communities in the Commonwealth were connected. Folks are much more jaded now than during that era, yet I continue to hope that citizens will engage and consider the many complex facets of proposing mega-casinos in Massachusetts.
"Casinos change everything"
- Spectrum Gaming representative
Town of Monson
Impacts on Education – 2008
The town of Monson offers PreK-12 public education with separate elementary, middle school and high school buildings/campus. The central offices are housed in a former school building. Monson high school students have the option to apply to attend Pathfinder Regional Technical Vocational High School in Palmer, Massachusetts. The Town of Monson is a member town of the regional vocational high school district, and is assessed an annual cost based on the number of students attending. Public transportation is provided for all students at no additional cost, PreK-grade 6. Student/families are assessed a rider fee of (FY 07) $1.00 per day ($180.00) to use school buses grades 7-12. Monson is a rural residential community encompassing 45 sq. miles with many students living in excess of 5 miles from the centrally located school campuses. Students/families are assessed athletic fees, parking fees (high school) and fees to participate in field trips as well as other school based activities. The school district no longer receives reimbursement for transportation or extraordinary special education (out of district, specialized van) transportation costs from the Commonwealth. There is no public transportation available in the Town of Monson.
Enrollment Indicators - Education Profile - Mass DOE website
Enrollment 1,525
Per pupil expenditures rank significantly below the state average: 2007
District $ 9, 075.00
State $11,868.00
The town supports education funding slightly over Net School Spending (the minimum figure set by the state) and provides additional funding through capital planning and repairs not included in the school budget.
A trend of grave concern to the school district budget is the increase of students opting for out of district placement through school choice and private or home school education which decreases available funds for the Monson School District.
Payments to out of school districts:
2006 = 5.3% of budget
2007 = 6.72% of budget
Potential surge in student enrollment trigger fiscal concerns primarily in the following areas:
Special Education: Including mandated placement out of district, specialized transportation, CNA-medically trained personnel, assistive technology and specialized out of district testing and evaluations.
ELL – specialized language teachers and materials not currently in the budget or staffing and not expected without an influx of new populations.
Transportation – the rural residential community of Monson with 113 miles of roads incurs significant costs to transport students. Additional buses and fuel to service additional routes and students without state assistance is untenable. Over 78 % of the roads are in poor condition (Pioneer Valley Planning Commission study) with additional traffic leading to further deterioration.
School Building Capacity- The Town of Monson invested with the Commonwealth in building an elementary school in 1992, renovating the Jr.-Sr. High School into a Middle School (2002) and the construction of a new High School (2001). The elementary school and middle school populations are near capacity, the high school is over 85% capacity. An influx of students would require reconfiguration of the schools and trigger the possible need for new construction.
Taxation and Revenues - The rural residential community of Monson tax base is residential. Property values for median single households, FY 2007 = $222,099 are significantly below the state average $406,673.
Income per Capita (1999), Monson : State = $22,519 : $25, 952.
Equalized Valuation (2006), Monson : State = $80,464 : $153,979.
The average residential tax bill ($2,825, FY 08) is a fraction of per pupil expenditure. The tax burden for student surge would be on the residential property owner in the Town of Monson.
Fiscal Year 2008 Average Single Family Tax Bill**
Number of Single Family Parcels
2,652
Assessed Value of Single Family
237,009
Average Single Family Tax Bill
2,825
State Average Single Family Tax Bill
Fiscal Year 2005
3,588
Fiscal Year 2006
3,801
http://www.mass.gov/Ador/docs/dls/mdmstuf/aag/aag191.doc
The ability to raise and appropriate additional local revenues is restricted by Proposition 2 ½ and the realistic limitation of the community’s socio-economic status. The Commonwealth does not fully fund mandated Special Education, Special and Regular Education Transportation, mandated ELL instruction and materials. It is unknown if/what the Commonwealth would provide for school building assistance in the future should the Town of Monson require additional schools following recent construction of the middle and high school buildings.
Additional breakdown of local and state per pupil expenditures: The average residential tax bill ($2,825, FY 08) is a fraction of per pupil expenditure ($9,075, FY 07 - most recent available).The revenues needed to meet student surge would be assumed by a combination of state aid and the residential property owner in the Town of Monson. The tax base is rural residential with a low commercial tax base, and additional state aid (Chapter 70) would be needed.Special Education is funded locally until expenditures in excess of $31K per student are expended. At that point, the district is eligible for 75% reimbursement of extraordinary costs through the "Special Education Circuit Breaker" from the state. Projections for FY 09 Local receipts for education (raised from Monson taxpayers) = 5,089,159.State Aid (Ch 70) = 7,708,640 (about 64% of education funding in Monson is from state aid).Total foundation budget = 12,797,798.No County appropriations.FY 09, Local Tax Levy (maximum allowable under proposition 2 1/2) = $9,067,915.Assuming continued 36:64 ratio of local appropriation to state aid funding of education, each non-special education student that enters the Monson school district would inflate the budget by over $9,075 (FY 07 - it is higher for FY 08, but figures have not yet been released by DOE) with 36% needing to be raised locally and 64% from the state.
Incremental student increases require additional transportation funding which is no longer supported by state funds. The actual costs would be determined by the number of additional routes required.It is critical to note that education budgets are fluid and static numbers will only capture a portion of the challenges faced to support growing school districts. English language learners (ELL) may trigger mandated specialized instruction and materials as noted above that are currently not available in the district.
The current spike in mandated special education funding is nearly equivalent to the town’s entire increase in the 2 1/2 percent levy. The outcome of those increased educational costs has meant that the increases in fixed costs; energy, health insurance and pensions had to be absorbed in other areas of the town budget resulting in layoffs. Each spike in school funding negatively impacts other municipal operations because the town is mandated by Net School Spending but ironically, the municipality is not mandated to provide minimum public safety, highway or other services to the residents.
Respectfully submitted,
Kathleen Conley Norbut, M.Ed., LMHC
Local Casino Study Committee, Chairman
Selectman
Monson
June 17, 2008
I came into the world in Massachusetts in the 60's, there was idealism, hope and a belief that all Americans and communities in the Commonwealth were connected. Folks are much more jaded now than during that era, yet I continue to hope that citizens will engage and consider the many complex facets of proposing mega-casinos in Massachusetts.
"Casinos change everything"
- Spectrum Gaming representative
Town of Monson
Impacts on Education – 2008
The town of Monson offers PreK-12 public education with separate elementary, middle school and high school buildings/campus. The central offices are housed in a former school building. Monson high school students have the option to apply to attend Pathfinder Regional Technical Vocational High School in Palmer, Massachusetts. The Town of Monson is a member town of the regional vocational high school district, and is assessed an annual cost based on the number of students attending. Public transportation is provided for all students at no additional cost, PreK-grade 6. Student/families are assessed a rider fee of (FY 07) $1.00 per day ($180.00) to use school buses grades 7-12. Monson is a rural residential community encompassing 45 sq. miles with many students living in excess of 5 miles from the centrally located school campuses. Students/families are assessed athletic fees, parking fees (high school) and fees to participate in field trips as well as other school based activities. The school district no longer receives reimbursement for transportation or extraordinary special education (out of district, specialized van) transportation costs from the Commonwealth. There is no public transportation available in the Town of Monson.
Enrollment Indicators - Education Profile - Mass DOE website
Enrollment 1,525
Per pupil expenditures rank significantly below the state average: 2007
District $ 9, 075.00
State $11,868.00
The town supports education funding slightly over Net School Spending (the minimum figure set by the state) and provides additional funding through capital planning and repairs not included in the school budget.
A trend of grave concern to the school district budget is the increase of students opting for out of district placement through school choice and private or home school education which decreases available funds for the Monson School District.
Payments to out of school districts:
2006 = 5.3% of budget
2007 = 6.72% of budget
Potential surge in student enrollment trigger fiscal concerns primarily in the following areas:
Special Education: Including mandated placement out of district, specialized transportation, CNA-medically trained personnel, assistive technology and specialized out of district testing and evaluations.
ELL – specialized language teachers and materials not currently in the budget or staffing and not expected without an influx of new populations.
Transportation – the rural residential community of Monson with 113 miles of roads incurs significant costs to transport students. Additional buses and fuel to service additional routes and students without state assistance is untenable. Over 78 % of the roads are in poor condition (Pioneer Valley Planning Commission study) with additional traffic leading to further deterioration.
School Building Capacity- The Town of Monson invested with the Commonwealth in building an elementary school in 1992, renovating the Jr.-Sr. High School into a Middle School (2002) and the construction of a new High School (2001). The elementary school and middle school populations are near capacity, the high school is over 85% capacity. An influx of students would require reconfiguration of the schools and trigger the possible need for new construction.
Taxation and Revenues - The rural residential community of Monson tax base is residential. Property values for median single households, FY 2007 = $222,099 are significantly below the state average $406,673.
Income per Capita (1999), Monson : State = $22,519 : $25, 952.
Equalized Valuation (2006), Monson : State = $80,464 : $153,979.
The average residential tax bill ($2,825, FY 08) is a fraction of per pupil expenditure. The tax burden for student surge would be on the residential property owner in the Town of Monson.
Fiscal Year 2008 Average Single Family Tax Bill**
Number of Single Family Parcels
2,652
Assessed Value of Single Family
237,009
Average Single Family Tax Bill
2,825
State Average Single Family Tax Bill
Fiscal Year 2005
3,588
Fiscal Year 2006
3,801
http://www.mass.gov/Ador/docs/dls/mdmstuf/aag/aag191.doc
The ability to raise and appropriate additional local revenues is restricted by Proposition 2 ½ and the realistic limitation of the community’s socio-economic status. The Commonwealth does not fully fund mandated Special Education, Special and Regular Education Transportation, mandated ELL instruction and materials. It is unknown if/what the Commonwealth would provide for school building assistance in the future should the Town of Monson require additional schools following recent construction of the middle and high school buildings.
Additional breakdown of local and state per pupil expenditures: The average residential tax bill ($2,825, FY 08) is a fraction of per pupil expenditure ($9,075, FY 07 - most recent available).The revenues needed to meet student surge would be assumed by a combination of state aid and the residential property owner in the Town of Monson. The tax base is rural residential with a low commercial tax base, and additional state aid (Chapter 70) would be needed.Special Education is funded locally until expenditures in excess of $31K per student are expended. At that point, the district is eligible for 75% reimbursement of extraordinary costs through the "Special Education Circuit Breaker" from the state. Projections for FY 09 Local receipts for education (raised from Monson taxpayers) = 5,089,159.State Aid (Ch 70) = 7,708,640 (about 64% of education funding in Monson is from state aid).Total foundation budget = 12,797,798.No County appropriations.FY 09, Local Tax Levy (maximum allowable under proposition 2 1/2) = $9,067,915.Assuming continued 36:64 ratio of local appropriation to state aid funding of education, each non-special education student that enters the Monson school district would inflate the budget by over $9,075 (FY 07 - it is higher for FY 08, but figures have not yet been released by DOE) with 36% needing to be raised locally and 64% from the state.
Incremental student increases require additional transportation funding which is no longer supported by state funds. The actual costs would be determined by the number of additional routes required.It is critical to note that education budgets are fluid and static numbers will only capture a portion of the challenges faced to support growing school districts. English language learners (ELL) may trigger mandated specialized instruction and materials as noted above that are currently not available in the district.
The current spike in mandated special education funding is nearly equivalent to the town’s entire increase in the 2 1/2 percent levy. The outcome of those increased educational costs has meant that the increases in fixed costs; energy, health insurance and pensions had to be absorbed in other areas of the town budget resulting in layoffs. Each spike in school funding negatively impacts other municipal operations because the town is mandated by Net School Spending but ironically, the municipality is not mandated to provide minimum public safety, highway or other services to the residents.
Respectfully submitted,
Kathleen Conley Norbut, M.Ed., LMHC
Local Casino Study Committee, Chairman
Selectman
Monson
June 17, 2008
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Spectrum Gaming Consulting Report Released
Governor Patrick commissioned Spectrum Gaming to provide an independent analysis of the market, impacts and review of the casino legislation that he proposed October 2007 and was subsequently killed by the House of Representatives in the spring of 2008.
The report has been released with an eleven page executive summary and a three hundred one page full report .
The town of Monson is highlighted in the report. I had the pleasure of meeting the VP of Spectrum who visited our community and attended a meeting of the western MA Casino Task Force. The firm's representative was an intelligent man who listened attentively to concerns expressed by Selectmen and Town Councillors in our region. It was a pleasure to meet him and I am pleased that our community was considered in the report. The number one concern of Monson residents in a community survey about casinos was the "character of the town". We like our rural town and have grave concerns about the potential siting of a casino in an abutting community. The fiscal impacts of student surge are highlighted in the report.
The situation in Monson
Monson is a rural, residential town (8,359) in western Massachusetts – in many ways a typical small town in the state. Its school district had a school enrollment of 1,525 for the 2007-08 school year. It spent $14.4 million to educate its students, or $9,075 per pupil. Of that amount, 36 percent came from Monson taxpayers and 64 percent came from state aid.
Town leaders said they fear that a major casino resort built near Monson would cause the student population to swell from casino-employee families seeking to live close to their employer. Each non-special education student that enters Monson Public Schools would inflate the district‘s budget by $9,075. The amount could be higher if the surge included students who required special education or English language learners (ELL); there currently are no ELLs in Monson Public Schools. (We note that many of the families that are attracted to a region because it offers casino employment come from non-English speaking cultures. This often requires a concomitant investment in unanticipated programs such as teaching English as a second language.)
Further, the Monson elementary and middle school populations are ―near capacity and the high school is at more than 85 percent capacity. School transportation, which is funded locally, is another costly concern, according to Kathleen Conley Norbut, a Monson Selectman and Chairman of the town‘s Local Casino Study Committee. ―Additional buses and fuel to service additional routes and students without state assistance is untenable, she said. The school district already assesses students in grades 7-12 $1 per day, or $180 per year, to ride the school bus. (Update: Price increase for 2008-2009 - whoops, let me find our bill $210 for the year-KCN). With an average single-family property tax bill in the town of $2,825 for fiscal year 2008, town leaders say they would be forced to raise property taxes – perhaps dramatically – to adequately fund a surge in school enrollment. Most of that burden would fall on the residents, as residential property taxes account for 93 percent of the town‘s annual tax receipts. Norbut noted that in other nearby towns, such as Brimfield, Holland and Wales, residents account for closer to 100 percent of the local-tax burden. We recognize that even small changes in school enrollment in small communities can have a significant impact on school budgets. The Commonwealth must be prepared to offer financial assistance to such communities from mitigation programs, irrespective of the size of such impacts.
You betcha.
The report has been released with an eleven page executive summary and a three hundred one page full report .
The town of Monson is highlighted in the report. I had the pleasure of meeting the VP of Spectrum who visited our community and attended a meeting of the western MA Casino Task Force. The firm's representative was an intelligent man who listened attentively to concerns expressed by Selectmen and Town Councillors in our region. It was a pleasure to meet him and I am pleased that our community was considered in the report. The number one concern of Monson residents in a community survey about casinos was the "character of the town". We like our rural town and have grave concerns about the potential siting of a casino in an abutting community. The fiscal impacts of student surge are highlighted in the report.
The situation in Monson
Monson is a rural, residential town (8,359) in western Massachusetts – in many ways a typical small town in the state. Its school district had a school enrollment of 1,525 for the 2007-08 school year. It spent $14.4 million to educate its students, or $9,075 per pupil. Of that amount, 36 percent came from Monson taxpayers and 64 percent came from state aid.
Town leaders said they fear that a major casino resort built near Monson would cause the student population to swell from casino-employee families seeking to live close to their employer. Each non-special education student that enters Monson Public Schools would inflate the district‘s budget by $9,075. The amount could be higher if the surge included students who required special education or English language learners (ELL); there currently are no ELLs in Monson Public Schools. (We note that many of the families that are attracted to a region because it offers casino employment come from non-English speaking cultures. This often requires a concomitant investment in unanticipated programs such as teaching English as a second language.)
Further, the Monson elementary and middle school populations are ―near capacity and the high school is at more than 85 percent capacity. School transportation, which is funded locally, is another costly concern, according to Kathleen Conley Norbut, a Monson Selectman and Chairman of the town‘s Local Casino Study Committee. ―Additional buses and fuel to service additional routes and students without state assistance is untenable, she said. The school district already assesses students in grades 7-12 $1 per day, or $180 per year, to ride the school bus. (Update: Price increase for 2008-2009 - whoops, let me find our bill $210 for the year-KCN). With an average single-family property tax bill in the town of $2,825 for fiscal year 2008, town leaders say they would be forced to raise property taxes – perhaps dramatically – to adequately fund a surge in school enrollment. Most of that burden would fall on the residents, as residential property taxes account for 93 percent of the town‘s annual tax receipts. Norbut noted that in other nearby towns, such as Brimfield, Holland and Wales, residents account for closer to 100 percent of the local-tax burden. We recognize that even small changes in school enrollment in small communities can have a significant impact on school budgets. The Commonwealth must be prepared to offer financial assistance to such communities from mitigation programs, irrespective of the size of such impacts.
You betcha.
Friday, August 1, 2008
Borgata "Babes" and Poker "Stinks"
Here are a few choice news articles on the inside happenings of casino life.
"Borgata Babes" settle discrimination suit
Philly.com Fri, 01 Aug 2008 1:28 AM PDT
Two former cocktail waitresses have settled their discrimination suit against the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa, Atlantic City's most opulent attraction.
For large gambler, it's the Borgata that stinks
The Philadelphia Inquirer Fri, 01 Aug 2008 0:44 AM PDT
Michael Wax thinks he was the butt of a fat joke, and he doesn't think it's funny at all. Wax, 54, of Brooklyn, who weighs 440 pounds, already was annoyed that employees at the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa in Atlantic City had asked him to leave a poker table Tuesday because of his pungent body odor.
Weight program suit against casino settled
Moldova.org Thu, 31 Jul 2008 5:07 PM PDT
A lawsuit brought against an Atlantic City, N.J., casino by former cocktail servers who objected to a mandatory weight program has been settled out of court. The $70 million lawsuit against Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa was settled before it could go to trial, but the details of the settlement were not released, the Press of Atlantic City reported Thursday.However, the settlement allows Borgata to ...
Thursday July 31, 2008 - 15:58 EST
Rolling Good Times Thu, 31 Jul 2008 1:03 PM PDT
The beauty about playing the slots online is you don't have to worry about your "odor" offending other players. Just ask Michael Wax. After a 17-hour poker session at the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa in Atlantic City, the smell of the 440-pound man began to grate on his fellow players.
Sheesh! How regressive can Americans and an industry get? Put on your thinking caps Massachusetts.
"Borgata Babes" settle discrimination suit
Philly.com Fri, 01 Aug 2008 1:28 AM PDT
Two former cocktail waitresses have settled their discrimination suit against the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa, Atlantic City's most opulent attraction.
For large gambler, it's the Borgata that stinks
The Philadelphia Inquirer Fri, 01 Aug 2008 0:44 AM PDT
Michael Wax thinks he was the butt of a fat joke, and he doesn't think it's funny at all. Wax, 54, of Brooklyn, who weighs 440 pounds, already was annoyed that employees at the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa in Atlantic City had asked him to leave a poker table Tuesday because of his pungent body odor.
Weight program suit against casino settled
Moldova.org Thu, 31 Jul 2008 5:07 PM PDT
A lawsuit brought against an Atlantic City, N.J., casino by former cocktail servers who objected to a mandatory weight program has been settled out of court. The $70 million lawsuit against Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa was settled before it could go to trial, but the details of the settlement were not released, the Press of Atlantic City reported Thursday.However, the settlement allows Borgata to ...
Thursday July 31, 2008 - 15:58 EST
Rolling Good Times Thu, 31 Jul 2008 1:03 PM PDT
The beauty about playing the slots online is you don't have to worry about your "odor" offending other players. Just ask Michael Wax. After a 17-hour poker session at the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa in Atlantic City, the smell of the 440-pound man began to grate on his fellow players.
Sheesh! How regressive can Americans and an industry get? Put on your thinking caps Massachusetts.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Monday, March 17, 2008
DOA - Why Governor Patrick’s Casino Bill Failed
The Legislature will hold public hearings on the casino bill submitted by Governor Patrick October 11, 2007 and others related to gambling this week. The DOA reality of the casino bill was obscured by months of media coverage of the endorsements of some unions, mayors and business associations. The suspense and drama of the casino proposal was fueled by the emerging dynamics between the Speaker of the House, Sal DiMasi (D-Boston) and Governor Patrick. Regional groups of municipal leaders formed coalitions to map their concerns about the bill and statewide anti-casino groups cobbled together what has now become a strong movement to stop class III casinos in Massachusetts.
The bill was DOA because the Administration submitted a shoddy piece of legislation that lacked transparency, accountability and most importantly from the playbook, Politics 101, lacked inclusion of stakeholders. The people who live and work in the regions that would be impacted are the real stakeholders, not Sheldon Adelson, Donald Trump, Mohegan investors, or even union officials or mayors from distant cities. It was a big mistake on the part of the Administration to not do what they had done successfully as candidates, which was to connect with people, especially their base. Had they done so, they would have learned that time and energy placed in the direction of bringing class III casinos to Massachusetts would be wasted.
The bill was DOA because the numbers don’t work. The collapse of the Administration and AFL-CIO president Bob Haynes’ claims of 30,000 construction jobs was a stake in the coffin of the decomposing casino bill. The Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation’s report squarely refuted the Administration’s revenue projections and the venerable Boston Business Journal slammed the economic argument for casinos highlighting the negative impacts on local businesses. Local and regional task forces in the southeastern and western/central parts of the state near Middleborough and Palmer/Warren met to study the casino bill and found numerous problems with the language, proposed mitigation, structure and oversight of the Gaming Control Authority and the revenues.
The bill was DOA because Speaker DiMasi, Rep. Dan Bosley (D-North Adams) and the Economic Development and Emerging Technologies Committee majority know the numbers don’t work. They are a rather serious bunch whose job is to study economic proposals and they are more seasoned with the Legislative process than the Administration.
The majority of the citizens of the Commonwealth are not casino gamblers. However, numerous polls have shown support for casinos provided they are not located near one’s community. With the national build-out of casinos reaching saturation, the insatiable casino industry has spent millions of dollars to get Massachusetts into the stable of states to offer 24/7 exploitive slot-based gambling. Despite the lobbying money and attempts to influence power by the casino corporate complex, an interesting phenomenon occurred. Citizens of Massachusetts are well educated and have a strong sense of civic engagement. We also recognize the unique history and character of the Commonwealth. We participated in forums, debates, blogs, research and discovery on the casino issue. We found like the Legislators who have actually read and vetted the casino bill, that it is a bad idea.
It was DOA because it is wrong for Massachusetts. People have done their homework to see past the promises of temporary economic boost to the net negative impacts to families, society, environment, infrastructure and the costs of mitigation. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts offers innovation, history, education and natural beauty in a dynamic and interesting mix. Mutual prosperity has and will be found in growing and preserving those unique and precious traits.
Kathleen Conley Norbut, Selectman
Chair, Local Casino Study Committee
Member, Western MA Casino Task Force
Open Letter to Governor Patrick from Patrick Coordinators
For Immediate Release
Open Letter to Deval Patrick on Casinos from Patrick Coordinators
Monday, March 17, 2008
Press Contact: Judith Seelig, 413-259-1268
Dear Governor Patrick:
We are Democrats who share a vision of a more equal, just, and democratic society. As Deval Patrick Volunteer Coordinators we supported your candidacy wholeheartedly and worked hard to help you secure the Democratic nomination and to put you in office.
Since becoming Governor you have undertaken many initiatives that make us proud to have been part of the Deval Patrick campaign. For example, we applaud the Municipal Partnership Act,and the proposal to require telephone companies to pay their fair share of property taxes.
But your proposal for resort casino gambling does not have our support. In fact, we are unequivocally opposed to it.
Early in the gubernatorial campaign you captured the essence of the argument for tax fairness. By reminding people that the discussion about“your money” is really a conversation about “your broken schools, your broken neighborhoods,” etc., you connected the dots. Many people (including those who had previously succumbed to the taxes-are-bad propaganda) listened and learned.
Eschewing the anti-tax rhetoric and providing instead a vision of a decent society, were hallmarks of our campaign; your message was authentic and honest. In addition, it was a major factor in persuading many of us to support and promote your candidacy.
Our campaign moved forward the debate about revenue sources and, perhaps more significantly, the wider debate about the common good. Victory in 2006 could have been the springboard into a meaningful statewide discussion about refashioning taxation so that it reflects and embodies our aspirations as a Commonwealth. For a brief moment,there was a chance to talk about restoring the income tax to its 2001 levels.There was even a chance to lead a conversation about establishing a progressive income tax. With the right leadership (including, but not necessarily limited to, your own) we may be able to revive that conversation.
The debate regarding casino gambling represents an opportunity to advocate for a more equitable tax system. After suffering a clear defeat in 2002, the opponents of the income tax have reemerged, putting their question back on the ballot. So, once again, those of us who share your vision are onthe defensive, fighting a rearguard action to defend the very existence of the income tax. Instead wecould have been taking the initiative and shaping the discourse.
Given our desire to see realistic levels of public funding, why do we oppose resort casino gambling?Because we are Democrats. The platform of the Massachusetts Democratic Party commits the party to tax equity and responsible budgeting, special support for small businesses, sustainable development practices to foster economic stability for both urban and rural cities and towns, and the provision of a sustainable revenue source to finance state government that supports a healthy economy.
From what we observe in other states, casino gambling would not promote tax equity, responsible budgeting, sustainable development practices, or a sustainable revenue source,and likely would damage small businesses in Massachusetts. In short, it flies in the face of our party’s principles.
Resort casinos are a mechanism for transferring money from poor and middle class people to wealthy corporations. Any revenue that leaks out to the state via taxation along the way is far short of the amount necessary to ameliorate the social and economic damage that the industry causes.
Resort casino gambling would involve our state government in condoning and encouraging behavior that has led in far too many cases to personal financial ruin, the breakup of families, domestic violence, and child neglect. In addition to these social costs, resort casinos draw money away from local restaurants, stores, and farms, compounding the injury. So presenting resort casino gambling as a source of revenue that would benefit our communities is misleading. The academically documented experiences of other states suggest that resort casinos damage, rather than boost, local economies.
We remain committed to showing leadership in our communities and in our Democratic town, ward, and city committees. Day after day, week after week, month after month, we make the case for tax equity. We are asking you to show leadership as well, by abandoning the resort-casino proposal and focusing instead on a cause that is both more ambitious and more promising–fair and progressive taxation.
Yours sincerely,
Judith Seelig, Pelham
Pat Fiero, Leverett
Tom Hollocher, Sudbury
Jeanne Maloney, Sudbury
Kathleen Norbut, Monson
Carl Offner, Sudbury
Sharon Raymond, Shutesbury
Susan Triolo, Sunderland
Maxine Yarbrough, Sudbury
-- 30 --
Open Letter to Deval Patrick on Casinos from Patrick Coordinators
Monday, March 17, 2008
Press Contact: Judith Seelig, 413-259-1268
Dear Governor Patrick:
We are Democrats who share a vision of a more equal, just, and democratic society. As Deval Patrick Volunteer Coordinators we supported your candidacy wholeheartedly and worked hard to help you secure the Democratic nomination and to put you in office.
Since becoming Governor you have undertaken many initiatives that make us proud to have been part of the Deval Patrick campaign. For example, we applaud the Municipal Partnership Act,and the proposal to require telephone companies to pay their fair share of property taxes.
But your proposal for resort casino gambling does not have our support. In fact, we are unequivocally opposed to it.
Early in the gubernatorial campaign you captured the essence of the argument for tax fairness. By reminding people that the discussion about“your money” is really a conversation about “your broken schools, your broken neighborhoods,” etc., you connected the dots. Many people (including those who had previously succumbed to the taxes-are-bad propaganda) listened and learned.
Eschewing the anti-tax rhetoric and providing instead a vision of a decent society, were hallmarks of our campaign; your message was authentic and honest. In addition, it was a major factor in persuading many of us to support and promote your candidacy.
Our campaign moved forward the debate about revenue sources and, perhaps more significantly, the wider debate about the common good. Victory in 2006 could have been the springboard into a meaningful statewide discussion about refashioning taxation so that it reflects and embodies our aspirations as a Commonwealth. For a brief moment,there was a chance to talk about restoring the income tax to its 2001 levels.There was even a chance to lead a conversation about establishing a progressive income tax. With the right leadership (including, but not necessarily limited to, your own) we may be able to revive that conversation.
The debate regarding casino gambling represents an opportunity to advocate for a more equitable tax system. After suffering a clear defeat in 2002, the opponents of the income tax have reemerged, putting their question back on the ballot. So, once again, those of us who share your vision are onthe defensive, fighting a rearguard action to defend the very existence of the income tax. Instead wecould have been taking the initiative and shaping the discourse.
Given our desire to see realistic levels of public funding, why do we oppose resort casino gambling?Because we are Democrats. The platform of the Massachusetts Democratic Party commits the party to tax equity and responsible budgeting, special support for small businesses, sustainable development practices to foster economic stability for both urban and rural cities and towns, and the provision of a sustainable revenue source to finance state government that supports a healthy economy.
From what we observe in other states, casino gambling would not promote tax equity, responsible budgeting, sustainable development practices, or a sustainable revenue source,and likely would damage small businesses in Massachusetts. In short, it flies in the face of our party’s principles.
Resort casinos are a mechanism for transferring money from poor and middle class people to wealthy corporations. Any revenue that leaks out to the state via taxation along the way is far short of the amount necessary to ameliorate the social and economic damage that the industry causes.
Resort casino gambling would involve our state government in condoning and encouraging behavior that has led in far too many cases to personal financial ruin, the breakup of families, domestic violence, and child neglect. In addition to these social costs, resort casinos draw money away from local restaurants, stores, and farms, compounding the injury. So presenting resort casino gambling as a source of revenue that would benefit our communities is misleading. The academically documented experiences of other states suggest that resort casinos damage, rather than boost, local economies.
We remain committed to showing leadership in our communities and in our Democratic town, ward, and city committees. Day after day, week after week, month after month, we make the case for tax equity. We are asking you to show leadership as well, by abandoning the resort-casino proposal and focusing instead on a cause that is both more ambitious and more promising–fair and progressive taxation.
Yours sincerely,
Judith Seelig, Pelham
Pat Fiero, Leverett
Tom Hollocher, Sudbury
Jeanne Maloney, Sudbury
Kathleen Norbut, Monson
Carl Offner, Sudbury
Sharon Raymond, Shutesbury
Susan Triolo, Sunderland
Maxine Yarbrough, Sudbury
-- 30 --
Friday, February 1, 2008
Truth to Math
It's a wonder to see such optimistic projections about job development with casinos. The glossy presentations touting 20,000 permanent jobs and 30,000 construction jobs are compelling. Who wouldn't want economic development that has no downside like traffic, pollution, domestic violence, bankruptcy, corruption and burdens on local taxpayers, public school systems and infrastructure?
Mohegan representatives in their recent presentation (that cited no references in the handout) to the Palmer Citizen Committee reported projected development of "more than 1,500 construction jobs and approximately 3,000 new full-time jobs".
Wait a minute....
1,500 X 3 sites = 4,500 construction jobs....NOT 30,000.
3,000 full-time jobs X 3 sites = 9,000 jobs....NOT 20,000.
Here's the math.
Assuming conservativetax revenue at 300,000,000 which is the figure guaranteed in the bill and 800,000,000 in ten year license fees.
300,000,000 operational revenue (27% tax)
-124,000,000 lottery shortfall (which will increase with casino opening)
--------------
176,000,000 balance
- 80,000,000 Gaming Commission/year
--------------
96,000,000 balance
-300,000,000 The real costs for regional mitigation (4X what is allotted)
---------------
(204,000,000) DEFICIT
AGO, State Police, bankruptcies, district courts, DA's, etc. are additional expenses not accounted in the casino bill. Education impacts for migrant/new worker families in three regions (unknown, not considered or researched in the casino /proposals).
The loss after the first year will be (~204,000,000) not including additional mandatory educational funds. The funds to cover the losses will either come from the license fees (gone in three years) or be sucked from local budgets and existing programs. How will the losses be covered in years 5 and beyond?
Will the offset of income taxes from low/moderate income wages impact the fiscal picture? Not hardly.
When will the MSM report the real costs that the average Massachusetts citizen will bear if casinos are legal in MA????
Mohegan representatives in their recent presentation (that cited no references in the handout) to the Palmer Citizen Committee reported projected development of "more than 1,500 construction jobs and approximately 3,000 new full-time jobs".
Wait a minute....
1,500 X 3 sites = 4,500 construction jobs....NOT 30,000.
3,000 full-time jobs X 3 sites = 9,000 jobs....NOT 20,000.
Here's the math.
Assuming conservativetax revenue at 300,000,000 which is the figure guaranteed in the bill and 800,000,000 in ten year license fees.
300,000,000 operational revenue (27% tax)
-124,000,000 lottery shortfall (which will increase with casino opening)
--------------
176,000,000 balance
- 80,000,000 Gaming Commission/year
--------------
96,000,000 balance
-300,000,000 The real costs for regional mitigation (4X what is allotted)
---------------
(204,000,000) DEFICIT
AGO, State Police, bankruptcies, district courts, DA's, etc. are additional expenses not accounted in the casino bill. Education impacts for migrant/new worker families in three regions (unknown, not considered or researched in the casino /proposals).
The loss after the first year will be (~204,000,000) not including additional mandatory educational funds. The funds to cover the losses will either come from the license fees (gone in three years) or be sucked from local budgets and existing programs. How will the losses be covered in years 5 and beyond?
Will the offset of income taxes from low/moderate income wages impact the fiscal picture? Not hardly.
When will the MSM report the real costs that the average Massachusetts citizen will bear if casinos are legal in MA????
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
