More jobs across the spectrum were created in one month in Massachusetts - last month, than any casino will bring - without the costs, impacts and human pain of gambling addiction. It seems at times to this observer that many politicians are twenty years or more behind current research and lack vision for the future.....with some exceptions for whom I am grateful, as they give me hope.
Legalizing casinos in the Commonwealth is a bone-headed, backward, brain-dead, bad idea.
That's right, I said it.
Showing posts with label casino. Show all posts
Showing posts with label casino. Show all posts
Friday, May 21, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Lowell Sun Nails It
Accurate and thorough reporting by the Lowell Sun.
Dan Ring's article in the Republican was excellent as well. Imagine Mohegan Sun with all it's "responsible gaming" BS have a guy playing for 23 hours straight, lose 450,000 dollars and they don't know it?
Dan Ring's article in the Republican was excellent as well. Imagine Mohegan Sun with all it's "responsible gaming" BS have a guy playing for 23 hours straight, lose 450,000 dollars and they don't know it?
But after the formal press conference, Hartmann, in an interview, conceded that the Mohegan Sun failed to adequately deal with an addicted gambler from Western Massachusetts who said he lost a net $450,000 mostly at the Connecticut casino over the course of a year.
Hartmann talked with the gambler from the Berkshires after both participated in the press conference on the need for practices to ensure responsible gambling in the state.
Hartmann told “Scott,” the addicted gambler, that in hindsight, “I wish we had connected everything. Clearly, we didn’t handle it properly."
-Ya think?
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Eagles and Ducks
November 18, 2009
US Senate Candidates Khazei and Capuano endorse independent cost-benefit analysis before legalizing slots/casinos.(Boston) – United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts (USS Mass) a non-partisan statewide coalition announced today that it has received responses from two of the US Senate candidates to the questionnaire that was sent to candidates in October. “US Senate candidate Alan Khazei promptly returned the questionnaire and Congressman Michael Capuano filed his responses with our organization on Tuesday, November 17, 2009,” reported Kathleen Conley Norbut, President, United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts.
Despite an extension and reminders from USS Mass, four of the candidates (COAKLEY THE AG responsible for public and consumer safety! Pagliuca - it seems like the campaign may be a just a hobby. Brown - who fails the fiscal conservative test on this one by supporting slot parlors/racinos and expansion of government with the development of a new bureaucracy the Gaming Regulatory Control - hackocracy and taxpayer subsidizes costs of impacts and Jack E. Robinson) failed to respond to the questionnaire, which leaves taxpayers wondering if they understand the magnitude of the impacts of the proliferation of predatory gambling upon local economies, state and national policy. Each candidate was asked four questions regarding expanding predatory gambling including two questions about their position on the far-reaching implications of the Supreme Court decision in February 2009 relevant to native American tribes bringing lands into trust; the National Gambling Impact Study Commission Report recommendations which included a moratorium on slot/casino gambling in the United States and their position regarding a proposed independent cost-benefit analysis before legalizing any expanded predatory gambling, slots/casinos in the Commonwealth.
The candidate’s responses reveal that Mr. Khazei expressed his strong support for an independent cost-benefit analysis before legalizing any expansion of predatory gambling, slots/casinos with a detailed description of the depth of his knowledge and concerns about the costs associated with the slots/casino industry, “While we must commit ourselves to creating jobs and while monetary costs and benefits must be measured, we must not lose sight of what we treasure most in life. We must ask ourselves if casino gambling is worth it even at the expense of those among us who are most vulnerable.”
Congressman Capuano supports the proposed independent cost-benefit analysis before legalizing slots/casinos for the purpose of quantifying job creation. He expressed hesitation that there would be significant job creation with slot facilities. Congressman Capuano expressed sensitivity for Native Americans and a desire to see more non-casino job creation on reservations, “It is important to be sensitive to issues of identity and self-definition, with regard to Native Americans and, indeed, to all persons. That said, the larger community is affected by decisions governing recourse to the Indian Reorganization Act.”
“We are pleased that two candidates chose not to duck these controversial issues by taking the time to address these matters that impact economic, public health, consumer protection, safety and future decisions for the Commonwealth and the nation,” stated Ms. Norbut. The full text of the candidates responses are posted on the USS Mass website.
######
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Independent Data-Driven Cost-Benefit Analysis
Date: Sunday, October 18, 2009, 9:21 AM
Dear Honorable Representatives,
I would like to thank you for beginning the process of taking an independent analysis of the expanded predatory gambling slot/casino issue with the development of a commission to review suitability of sites for any potential facilities. I would encourage you to consider a commission comprised of local officials, regional planners, economists and independent non-gambling analysts.
Prior to that step however, it is incumbent upon the Legislature and the Administration to appoint an independent cost-benefit analysis, similar to the recently formed commission by Governor Lynch, NH to study the models, short-term and long-term impacts of the industry.
During this difficult time of economic downturn, it may be tempting to look for a "quick fix" for jobs and revenues. However, the predatory gambling slot/casino industry is extremely complex, requires costly oversight and creates long-term economic drain. Please perform due diligence and commission a balanced if not independent data-driven, cost-benefit analysis of the proposals to expand gambling in the Commonwealth. A blue ribbon commission should not require tax dollars to perform it's task. The Western MA Casino Task Force has meet for over two years studying proposals to expand gambling, developed a ground-breaking summary of regional and local impacts with technical assistance from the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and no funding for the on-going work...most of us have served without compensation.
As a former Selectman and member of the Western MA Casino Task Force, I have researched and found that slots/casinos have proven to be permanent, regressive solutions to a temporary economic problem. Once the door to slots is opened, it has never been shut in the US (Russian has re-criminalized slots due to the economic instability generated). Many states have set maximum numbers on facilities only to become dependent on the every increasing need to sponsor additional gambling for state coffers. The impacts to host regions must be quantified and mitigated along with the comprehensive costs to taxpayers to subsidize the industry that has unique
known negative impacts.
Dear Honorable Representatives,
I would like to thank you for beginning the process of taking an independent analysis of the expanded predatory gambling slot/casino issue with the development of a commission to review suitability of sites for any potential facilities. I would encourage you to consider a commission comprised of local officials, regional planners, economists and independent non-gambling analysts.
Prior to that step however, it is incumbent upon the Legislature and the Administration to appoint an independent cost-benefit analysis, similar to the recently formed commission by Governor Lynch, NH to study the models, short-term and long-term impacts of the industry.
During this difficult time of economic downturn, it may be tempting to look for a "quick fix" for jobs and revenues. However, the predatory gambling slot/casino industry is extremely complex, requires costly oversight and creates long-term economic drain. Please perform due diligence and commission a balanced if not independent data-driven, cost-benefit analysis of the proposals to expand gambling in the Commonwealth. A blue ribbon commission should not require tax dollars to perform it's task. The Western MA Casino Task Force has meet for over two years studying proposals to expand gambling, developed a ground-breaking summary of regional and local impacts with technical assistance from the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and no funding for the on-going work...most of us have served without compensation.
As a former Selectman and member of the Western MA Casino Task Force, I have researched and found that slots/casinos have proven to be permanent, regressive solutions to a temporary economic problem. Once the door to slots is opened, it has never been shut in the US (Russian has re-criminalized slots due to the economic instability generated). Many states have set maximum numbers on facilities only to become dependent on the every increasing need to sponsor additional gambling for state coffers. The impacts to host regions must be quantified and mitigated along with the comprehensive costs to taxpayers to subsidize the industry that has unique
known negative impacts.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Inquiring Minds Want to Know
What are people really saying about the Western MA Casino Task Force groundbreaking report?
Following the advice of Sen. Stephen M. Brewer, D-Barre, the task force created a list of concerns that could be included in any future amendment process regarding casino or slot legislation.
"I was brought up to believe that the only thing worth doing was to add to the sum of accurate information in the world." -Margaret Mead
Following the advice of Sen. Stephen M. Brewer, D-Barre, the task force created a list of concerns that could be included in any future amendment process regarding casino or slot legislation.
Brewer, who received the letter recently, said, "They sent me a mountain of very good, creative ideas, some of the best ideas I have seen yet . . . It's the right thing for the region to have responsible planning."
Senator Candaras (D-Wilbraham) said, "You left no stone unturned."
Senator Karen Spilka (D-Ashland) said, "You have raised very important issues and I will study this further."
John Kindt, Esq (National Gambling Expert, Author, Professor), "Very thorough analysis."
"I was brought up to believe that the only thing worth doing was to add to the sum of accurate information in the world." -Margaret Mead
When the facts scare people - attack!
The decline of the fourth estate is evident everywhere. Lack of investigative reporting, tabloid/gossip and other garbage presented as news.
It is a hot and hazy mid-August day in western Massachusetts and the news must be slow. So, the Republican newspaper printed this article which attempts to fan speculation, rumor and undermine the work the western MA casino task force. A rather long article to show that some officials in one town don't like it that some officials in another town donated money to an anti-casino group.
There is a problem with the quality of reporting (by a talented writer, I might add) because it serves to muddle the different layers of committees and individual actions of the people identified in the article (which editor prompted the reporter to pursue this "sensational" angle for an article?). The failure to clarify the roles of different committees and separate professional and personal actions is a disservice to the readers, the participants in the process and the region. In the case of Monson officials, no stipends are received for service.
So, let me clarify what the article failed to accomplish. There is a local casino study committee (LCSC) in the town of Monson established about 1 1/2 years ago, which I chair. This committee has been inactive over the past year following preliminary research and a report to the town of the results of a questionnaire to residents. The LCSC is scheduled to meet again in September for updates on proposed legislation. There has not been a compelling reason to meet following the vote in the House to procedurally defeat slots, which are not legal in the Commonwealth and all the buzz about a mega-casino in an abutting town is speculation at this point. There may be more to discuss as the Legislature takes action in the fall.
There is a Western MA Casino Task Force (WMCAT), comprised of 15 communities that has studied the potential impacts on the region for almost two years. The WMCAT wrote a letter to legislators listing the concerns, dated July 23, 2009 and I have posted it downthread. The task force has received technical assistance from Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and has no position on slots/casinos beyond advocating for the region. The Republican devoted more space reporting the gossip in today's article than the groundbreaking work of the task force.
The Monson Board of Selectmen has stated as a board that they are neutral on the issue.
Some Palmer Town Councilors and the paid liaison for Northeast Realty also an elected official, are pro-casino. That's their personal right, I have no comment on their position. I have no comment on the position of other Town Councilors or Selectboard members in the region who have a personal opinion on the issue either. I certainly hope they have studied the issue thoroughly and have an idea of where they stand as well as a clear understanding of the potential impacts on their community. The Palmer Town Council has not taken a vote to endorse or oppose a casino in their community to the best of my knowledge. OK, so, what? My opinion of the Palmer Town Council's position on casinos is not any more newsworthy than their opinion of the Monson Board of Selectmen's position on casinos. The remarks and in fact, the entire article is a distraction from the real issues, which are the potential impacts and advocating for appropriate mitigation should the Legislature legalize the electronic gambling devices, known as slots.
Personally, after 15 years of research on the issues of gambling, addiction, public health, municipal and environmental impacts, I am opposed to slots/casinos. Philosophically, I concur with Walter Chronkite that funding government from gambling is "cynical". Politically, I agree with the resolution against predatory slot gambling passed at the Democratic State Convention. Economically, I support small businesses and deplore welfare for corporations that take from the working and middle class.
Personally, I plan to exercise my right to free speech on this issue, including funding organizations that oppose expanded gambling and electronic gambling devices, engineered to keep users "playing to extinction" (slots). I plan to exercise my right to free speech to debate the issue, not roll around in the muck of ad hominen distractions with those who would seek to shy from the serious matters at hand.
Gambling promises the poor what property performs for the rich -- something for nothing.
Author: George Bernard Shaw
It is a hot and hazy mid-August day in western Massachusetts and the news must be slow. So, the Republican newspaper printed this article which attempts to fan speculation, rumor and undermine the work the western MA casino task force. A rather long article to show that some officials in one town don't like it that some officials in another town donated money to an anti-casino group.
There is a problem with the quality of reporting (by a talented writer, I might add) because it serves to muddle the different layers of committees and individual actions of the people identified in the article (which editor prompted the reporter to pursue this "sensational" angle for an article?). The failure to clarify the roles of different committees and separate professional and personal actions is a disservice to the readers, the participants in the process and the region. In the case of Monson officials, no stipends are received for service.
So, let me clarify what the article failed to accomplish. There is a local casino study committee (LCSC) in the town of Monson established about 1 1/2 years ago, which I chair. This committee has been inactive over the past year following preliminary research and a report to the town of the results of a questionnaire to residents. The LCSC is scheduled to meet again in September for updates on proposed legislation. There has not been a compelling reason to meet following the vote in the House to procedurally defeat slots, which are not legal in the Commonwealth and all the buzz about a mega-casino in an abutting town is speculation at this point. There may be more to discuss as the Legislature takes action in the fall.
There is a Western MA Casino Task Force (WMCAT), comprised of 15 communities that has studied the potential impacts on the region for almost two years. The WMCAT wrote a letter to legislators listing the concerns, dated July 23, 2009 and I have posted it downthread. The task force has received technical assistance from Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and has no position on slots/casinos beyond advocating for the region. The Republican devoted more space reporting the gossip in today's article than the groundbreaking work of the task force.
The Monson Board of Selectmen has stated as a board that they are neutral on the issue.
Some Palmer Town Councilors and the paid liaison for Northeast Realty also an elected official, are pro-casino. That's their personal right, I have no comment on their position. I have no comment on the position of other Town Councilors or Selectboard members in the region who have a personal opinion on the issue either. I certainly hope they have studied the issue thoroughly and have an idea of where they stand as well as a clear understanding of the potential impacts on their community. The Palmer Town Council has not taken a vote to endorse or oppose a casino in their community to the best of my knowledge. OK, so, what? My opinion of the Palmer Town Council's position on casinos is not any more newsworthy than their opinion of the Monson Board of Selectmen's position on casinos. The remarks and in fact, the entire article is a distraction from the real issues, which are the potential impacts and advocating for appropriate mitigation should the Legislature legalize the electronic gambling devices, known as slots.
Personally, after 15 years of research on the issues of gambling, addiction, public health, municipal and environmental impacts, I am opposed to slots/casinos. Philosophically, I concur with Walter Chronkite that funding government from gambling is "cynical". Politically, I agree with the resolution against predatory slot gambling passed at the Democratic State Convention. Economically, I support small businesses and deplore welfare for corporations that take from the working and middle class.
Personally, I plan to exercise my right to free speech on this issue, including funding organizations that oppose expanded gambling and electronic gambling devices, engineered to keep users "playing to extinction" (slots). I plan to exercise my right to free speech to debate the issue, not roll around in the muck of ad hominen distractions with those who would seek to shy from the serious matters at hand.
Gambling promises the poor what property performs for the rich -- something for nothing.
Author: George Bernard Shaw
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Divisiveness not Kumbaya
The traffic simulation in Palmer brought pro casino union supporters from across the state along with local supporters to counter the 75 vehicles that drove through Palmer in an approved casino traffic simulation. An estimated 9,000 to 12,500 vehicles are projected (weekday:weekend).
Who is going to pay for the additional students we need to educate? When will the legislature perform a comprehensive cost analysis on the proposed corporate casino impacts on the region and provide data driven proposals for mitigation? If as I suspect, casinos are not net profit to the state and taxpayers, why would there be any hesitancy by our elected officials to study the matter including true costs of mitigation?
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.
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????
Monday, October 22, 2007
Recipe for Failure
Have you ever noticed that when you try to do too much, little gets done well? It's one of those persistent human condition things, that annoyingly leads to flaws and failure. When one's plate is too full, things get dropped and heartburn often follows.
The powerful contingent of four Republican senators in the state legislature has thrown another ingredient into the casino mix with a proposal to privatize the Lottery.
Things are looking pretty gooey.
From today's Globe:
"We shouldn't be running casinos, and we certainly shouldn't be running a
lottery," he went on. "It isn't a core mission of the government. The state
should be licensing and regulating the lottery like the governor has proposed
for the casinos." http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/10/22/group_pushes_to_privatize_lottery/
This presents a serious dilemma; one that surely is a core mission of government according to many loyal Red Sox fans and Treasurer Cahill...who will bring the trophy around when we win the World Series?
.jpg)
The powerful contingent of four Republican senators in the state legislature has thrown another ingredient into the casino mix with a proposal to privatize the Lottery.
Things are looking pretty gooey.
From today's Globe:
"We shouldn't be running casinos, and we certainly shouldn't be running a
lottery," he went on. "It isn't a core mission of the government. The state
should be licensing and regulating the lottery like the governor has proposed
for the casinos." http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/10/22/group_pushes_to_privatize_lottery/
This presents a serious dilemma; one that surely is a core mission of government according to many loyal Red Sox fans and Treasurer Cahill...who will bring the trophy around when we win the World Series?
.jpg)
Friday, October 19, 2007
Voice on Casinos to Power
Wednesday evening's successful Monson Voice on Casino meeting highlighted the need to expand the group to a regional citizen's vs. a Monson centric committee, a recommendation with which I concur.
http://www.masslive.com/metroeast/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-9/119277842776170.xml&coll=1
Meanwhile, the Middleborough Selectmen who unveiled their agreement with the Wampanoag tribe four days before a town vote are balking at the Patrick Bill that cedes local control. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/10/18/questions_loom_over_casino_plan/
http://www.masslive.com/metroeast/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-9/119277842776170.xml&coll=1
Meanwhile, the Middleborough Selectmen who unveiled their agreement with the Wampanoag tribe four days before a town vote are balking at the Patrick Bill that cedes local control. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/10/18/questions_loom_over_casino_plan/
If it ain't good for the pro-casino guys one needn't wonder why the rest of us don't like it.Bond agreed. "Right now, the agreement calls the tune, but with the commercial license, it would be the state calling the tune, so the state could impact what we get," Bond said.
Bond warned that the town could get far less if the deal with the Wampanoag is scrapped, and a casino is built as a commercially licensed establishment.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
"DRAFTING ERROR"
"When Governor Deval Patrick unveiled his casino plan last month, he said three destination resort casinos would generate $100 million to help host communities and their neighbors ease traffic and fight crime, and to pay for public health programs like compulsive gambling treatment and prevention.
But when the bill appeared last week, the amount of money earmarked for community mitigation and public health programs was only a fraction of what the governor promised: $27 million."
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/10/17/programs_face_gap_in_casino_payouts/
Even if the "DRAFTING ERROR" is corrected to a $50 million split between at least three sites, it would still be only a speck of what is needed.
But when the bill appeared last week, the amount of money earmarked for community mitigation and public health programs was only a fraction of what the governor promised: $27 million."
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/10/17/programs_face_gap_in_casino_payouts/
Even if the "DRAFTING ERROR" is corrected to a $50 million split between at least three sites, it would still be only a speck of what is needed.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Patrick Plan Congeals
It was reported in today's Globe http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/10/04/local_voters_would_rule_on_casino_idea/ that the Governor's plan will include a requirement that a potential host community hold a binding election to dis/approve the siting of a class III casino in their town or city.
The REGION should vote to approve/disapprove if a
potential class III casino is sited in a locale of
<25,000-30,000 population. Abutting communities
within the 30 mile radius of a proposed class III
casino should participate in a ballot election. If a
decision, the magnitude of a class III casino, is
decided by residents of one small community and the
residents of the wider region that will be adversely
impacted are not allowed to participate in the voting
process, democracy is breached.
Enterprises the size and scope of class III gambling
institutions with projections of 40,000 daily visitors
and known negative collateral impacts, require
specialized approval and siting conditions.
I hope these conditions will be endorsed by the
regional Selectmen's Coalition surrounding Palmer and
the Southeastern Regional Coalition surrounding
Middleborough as well as members of the Legislature.
Smart growth planning (that has been touted by the
current Administration, the Legislature and the
previous Administration) discourages large-scale
development in regions that are not previously
developed or require significant infrastructure
development. Smart growth policies encourage
development clustered around public transportation,
existing housing stock and resources to support
growth. These considerations need to be included in
the siting of any large-scale enterprise along with
environmental and historic considerations.
The REGION should vote to approve/disapprove if a
potential class III casino is sited in a locale of
<25,000-30,000 population. Abutting communities
within the 30 mile radius of a proposed class III
casino should participate in a ballot election. If a
decision, the magnitude of a class III casino, is
decided by residents of one small community and the
residents of the wider region that will be adversely
impacted are not allowed to participate in the voting
process, democracy is breached.
Enterprises the size and scope of class III gambling
institutions with projections of 40,000 daily visitors
and known negative collateral impacts, require
specialized approval and siting conditions.
I hope these conditions will be endorsed by the
regional Selectmen's Coalition surrounding Palmer and
the Southeastern Regional Coalition surrounding
Middleborough as well as members of the Legislature.
Smart growth planning (that has been touted by the
current Administration, the Legislature and the
previous Administration) discourages large-scale
development in regions that are not previously
developed or require significant infrastructure
development. Smart growth policies encourage
development clustered around public transportation,
existing housing stock and resources to support
growth. These considerations need to be included in
the siting of any large-scale enterprise along with
environmental and historic considerations.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
My letter to Governor Patrick, August 12, 2007
August 12, 2007
Dear Governor Patrick:
I am writing to express my concerns that the study on the impacts of Casino Gambling in the Commonwealth has not yet been released to the public. I am a Selectman in a small community (Monson) in central/western Massachusetts. Our community abuts the town of Palmer with state highway routes going through the town of Monson from the east, south and west to the town of Palmer. We do not have the infrastructure in any of the following areas to support a large enterprise such as a Casino (with known collateral negative impacts); school department, police, fire, EMT, emergency management, highway (roads and bridges), sewer, trash, and other municipal functions.
I would like to have the information that was compiled in the report. I have a duty and responsibility to protect the interests of the town, my neighbors and my family. Many of us live in this community because we value our rural way of life. I moved from the Boston area where I was born and educated twenty years ago to the town of Monson for the "quality of life" that it offers. A Casino would undoubtedly impact our town and I need to be able to assess the potential impact while advocating for the resources necessary to protect the town and its citizens. Will potential agreements that support Casino Gambling provide sustainable and substantial revenues to abutting communities?
We clearly need an economic engine in our region. Our area is economically depressed - the region west of Worcester County is frequently referred to as Massachusetts' third economy. As the state has experienced difficult fiscal times over the past several years, these have been disproportionately leveled in Hampden County where the towns of Monson and Palmer are located. Hampden County has the highest poverty rates in the Commonwealth for single-parenting women with children (Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women, 2006). Think about that statistic...it is a moral and social tragedy. I will need compelling evidence that a Casino in Massachusetts will alleviate those problems. Most of my research over the past several years reveals that Casinos have been revenue-neutral propositions with loss of local community-based business, character and quality of life to the host region.
Throughout history advancements in education, health, technology, and safety are the immutable tenants that have built strong and sustainable societies. None of those factors are intrinsic components of the Gambling Industry.
Please slow the rush to decisions on siting Casinos in Massachusetts in order to promote a thorough, citizen and community based dialog on these issues. I have rarely witnessed legislation fueled by fear, greed or haste be prudent or sustainable.
Thank you in advance for your consideration. I may be reached at (omitted for this post) if you wish to discuss this further and learn more from the local perspective.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Conley Norbut (D)
Dear Governor Patrick:
I am writing to express my concerns that the study on the impacts of Casino Gambling in the Commonwealth has not yet been released to the public. I am a Selectman in a small community (Monson) in central/western Massachusetts. Our community abuts the town of Palmer with state highway routes going through the town of Monson from the east, south and west to the town of Palmer. We do not have the infrastructure in any of the following areas to support a large enterprise such as a Casino (with known collateral negative impacts); school department, police, fire, EMT, emergency management, highway (roads and bridges), sewer, trash, and other municipal functions.
I would like to have the information that was compiled in the report. I have a duty and responsibility to protect the interests of the town, my neighbors and my family. Many of us live in this community because we value our rural way of life. I moved from the Boston area where I was born and educated twenty years ago to the town of Monson for the "quality of life" that it offers. A Casino would undoubtedly impact our town and I need to be able to assess the potential impact while advocating for the resources necessary to protect the town and its citizens. Will potential agreements that support Casino Gambling provide sustainable and substantial revenues to abutting communities?
We clearly need an economic engine in our region. Our area is economically depressed - the region west of Worcester County is frequently referred to as Massachusetts' third economy. As the state has experienced difficult fiscal times over the past several years, these have been disproportionately leveled in Hampden County where the towns of Monson and Palmer are located. Hampden County has the highest poverty rates in the Commonwealth for single-parenting women with children (Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women, 2006). Think about that statistic...it is a moral and social tragedy. I will need compelling evidence that a Casino in Massachusetts will alleviate those problems. Most of my research over the past several years reveals that Casinos have been revenue-neutral propositions with loss of local community-based business, character and quality of life to the host region.
Throughout history advancements in education, health, technology, and safety are the immutable tenants that have built strong and sustainable societies. None of those factors are intrinsic components of the Gambling Industry.
Please slow the rush to decisions on siting Casinos in Massachusetts in order to promote a thorough, citizen and community based dialog on these issues. I have rarely witnessed legislation fueled by fear, greed or haste be prudent or sustainable.
Thank you in advance for your consideration. I may be reached at (omitted for this post) if you wish to discuss this further and learn more from the local perspective.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Conley Norbut (D)
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Truth to Power
Here's an interesting twist on the uphill battle that the Administration faces.....NIMBY-Boston.
Some Boston legislators state casinos would be bad for their district. Yet they suggest they wouldn't mind if the problems associated with casinos are sited in southeastern or western Massachusetts and possibly the fertile terriority north of Boston....Winchester? Marblehead? Beverly Farms?
Some Boston legislators state casinos would be bad for their district. Yet they suggest they wouldn't mind if the problems associated with casinos are sited in southeastern or western Massachusetts and possibly the fertile terriority north of Boston....Winchester? Marblehead? Beverly Farms?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
