Suffolk Downs Casino?

[lexicon506]

There's been a lot of talk of casinos in Mass lately. Of course I'm for a revival of the racetrack...the more world-class events Boston attracts, the better the city becomes. Hopefully this will pump some life into that area, although I'm not sure I would welcome a Mohegan Sun-esque casino within the city limits.

MassCap?s back to put track in casino race
By Scott Van Voorhis/ Exclusive
Boston Herald Business Reporter
Wednesday, May 23, 2007 - Updated: 10:55 AM EST

Suffolk Downs new lead owner, Richard Fields, pledged to spend big to revive the battered Eastie track when he bought a controlling stake earlier this year.
Now the New York-based casino developer and horse racing enthusiast is making good with plans to bring back Suffolk?s showcase event, the historic MassCap.
In a move that is already generating buzz in racing circles, Fields and his fellow track owners are weighing plans to spend well over $1 million on the event - an unprecedented number for a struggling racetrack, executives familar with the plans said.
But there is more at work here than an attempt to save an old racetrack.
Fields decision to revive the MassCap is a downpayment on a much larger gamble.
The decision to bring back the MassCap is the first major public relations salvo in what is likely to be a long campaign to win state permission to turn Suffolk into Boston?s answer to Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods, insiders say. They call it part of a shrewd strategy to curry favor on Beacon Hill, where Fields hopes to win support to build a casino alongside the track.
Investing in the track will send the message to lawmakers that ?we will be an industry worth saving,? said Louis Ciarlone, the track?s union chief. ?We have gone from cautiously optimistic to very excited about the future.?
Under the previous regime, Suffolk tried to bludgeon state lawmakers into legalizing slot machines, with veiled threats to close and throw thousands of employees out of work.
Let just say it wasn?t a winning ticket.
The new approach, insiders say, is more soft sell, with the case being made that Suffolk, the state?s flagship racetrack, is worth saving.
The MassCap was Suffolk?s signature race, dating to when the track opened in 1935. The event long attracted some of the best horses in the country, from the legendary Seabiscuit, who raced before 40,000 in 1937, to Cigar, another champion, in the mid-1990s.The track, struggling to stay open, canceled the MassCap during the last two seasons.
Fields confirmed his decision to revive the MassCap - even as he sidestepped the more controversial casino question.
?Bringing back the historic MassCap is just one component of our extensive plan to return racing to greatness at Suffolk Downs,? Fields said in a statement.
He and fellow owners, who include Hub concessionnaire Joseph O?Donnell, are now busy hammering out the details of their plan to bring back the MassCap, most likely in September.
While a final number is still being hammered out, the owners are looking at spending hundreds of thousands on prize money, and hundreds of thousands more on bonuses to attract top horses.
There are also plans for concerts and other attractions around the time of the race to drive interest.
Fields made a fortune developing a casino for the Seminole Tribe in Florida. Now he?s prepared to spend another in hopes of making an even larger one in the Bay State.

[palindrome]

I like going to the track, but to echo what you said, I don't think I would like a huge casino within city limits.

I was there on opening day, for the Kentucky derby, and it was pretty packed. It is pretty dumpy though.

[atlantaden]

I don't think I would like a huge casino within city limits

Why not?

[singbat]

I don't think I would like a huge casino within city limits

Why not?
why tax the working class?

[palindrome]

I don't think I would like a huge casino within city limits

Why not?


I should have clarified. I would not be as opposed to a strict number of slots, as much as a fully fledged foxwoods-esque casino.

The can of worms a it could potentially open is dangerous. First Suffolk downs, next thing you know, gambling is fully legal everywhere in Boston. Of course this is an extremely far fetched scenario, but i think the possibility still exists, and with the large number of college students based directly in Boston, gambling could be a serious problem.

Don't get me wrong though, I would love to see the wampanogs get a casino though.

Ehh it's 1:30 right now and i am a little drunk so i will post a better response tomorrow or something. :idea:

[JimboJones]

We have already bailed-out racing at least once in Massachusetts .... how many more times are they going to ask for a hand-out?

It's not my problem that they aren't making enough money.

Close down.

No to casinos, while we're at it.

Casinos make a city "world-class"?

[BosDevelop]

Casinos make a city "world-class"?

No, but it is a fact that hundreds of thousands of Boston and Massachusetts residents like to gamble and spend money doing so right across the border in CT. So why should we just sit back and let the richest state in the country get richer? People who gamble are going to gamble no matter what whether it is lottery, on line, at Foxwoods/Mohegan or otherwise so why shouldn't we do everything we can to keep these dollars in our state instead of continuing to fill the pockets of the richest state in this country.

[lexicon506]

Casinos make a city "world-class"?

What I meant by "world-class" was the race, not a casino. You can't deny the prestige of events like the Kentucky Derby or Preakness, so why not try to bring back Boston's own race? Casinos are a different story, I think we can all agree that Las Vegas is not a world class city.

[atlantaden]

Casinos are a different story, I think we can all agree that Las Vegas is not a world class city.

Las Vegas might not be a world class city but it sure as hell is a world class destination! Boston is definitely a world class city but not really a world class destination. A couple of high-end casino's just might make it both!

[palindrome]

Combining both of your arguments, just give the wampanoagas their casino in New Bedford or Middleboro.

[nico]

I like that the Casinos are in CT b/c it gives you a good excuse to have to go away for the weekend.
Suffolk Downs will have some difficult obstacles to get around. The people living in Revere and East Boston have been against it in the past, and the parking lot is adjacent to a field of Gas Tanks.
If it did go through, would there have to be Native American involvement? And in the case of CT, where they are owned by Native Americans, does the State really benefit? I was under the impression that they operated tax free?

[bosman]

The key difference is whether or not they are on Indian land or not. If they are, the state gets no benefits whatsoever. If it isn't, then the state can still tax. I am not sure if Mohegan Sun and/or Foxwoods is on Indian land, but I know that Suffolk Downs isn't, so MA would get some benefit.

[palindrome]

I believe both Foxwoods and Mohegan sun pay 25% of their slot revenue to the state, but they are not taxed on table games etc...

Ct recieves about $400 million a year from the 2 casinos.

[Bobby Digital]

Boston is definitely a world class city

i LOVE Boston don't get me wrong, but calling it a world class city is a stretch. bigtime. only Bostonians think Boston is a world class city.

[singbat]

Boston is definitely a world class city

i LOVE Boston don't get me wrong, but calling it a world class city is a stretch. bigtime. only Bostonians think Boston is a world class city.

don't get me started....

[Beton Brut]

Suffolk Downs will have some difficult obstacles to get around. The people living in Revere and East Boston have been against it in the past, and the parking lot is adjacent to a field of Gas Tanks.

The issue that no one has addressed is a simple fact of infrastructure. As it stands today, the existing roads, mainly the McClellan Highway (Rt. 1A) are wholly inadequate for their current traffic volume, with numerous stoplights and ill-conceived traffic circles. The road is a bottleneck until it joins Rt 1 in northern Revere. This would have been less of an issue had I-95 been pushed north to Danvers in the 70's, but Governor Sargent put a moratorium on construction, and the land was sold to developers during the first Dukakis administration (yet another case of the 'burbs sticking it to the urbs).

Though I can't speak for my neighbors, I think trading the tank-farm for a "destination" like a casino would be acceptable, though my preference would be for a grid of streets and two dozen McAllen buildings, centered around transit nodes at Beachmont and Suffolk Downs stations.

Past proposals for the site (that were eliminated for the same traffic issues I've mentioned) included a replacement for the Boston Garden, a Tweeter Center style venue, and a new home for the Pats. I saw Radiohead there a few years back (walked to and from the gig) and though the concert was great, the traffic was an ill managed nightmare that lasted until 2AM.

As a side-note, my dad was the lieutenant of the uniformed security detail at Suffolk Downs in the mid-70's, after he retired from the State Police. His favorite aphorism about the track: "Even the fuckin' flag-pole is crooked."

[nico]

I'm sure you'd trade the tank-farm for the casino...I live in Chelsea and I'd love to have a casino replace our tanks, but I'm pretty sure those tanks have a no-trade clause.

[JimboJones]

While I hate hate hate the idea of casinos in MA, I do think Suffolk Downs would work. I agree, maybe it's too congested, and/or the roads need to be improved, but isn't it close enough to most major highways to make it a good fit? Also, isn't gambling all that people do in those neighborhoods? :wink:

I love gambling, just not in our state. I just think there are other revenue-making schemes more appealing.

[Beton Brut]

I agree, maybe it's too congested, and/or the roads need to be improved, but isn't it close enough to most major highways to make it a good fit?

Not really...Read my post above, or perhaps look at a map.

Also, isn't gambling all that people do in those neighborhoods?

I dunno -- I've lived in East Boston my entire live...I find myself reading a fair amount of books, attending cultural events, and working about 55 hours every week...Would you prefer that I refer to you as an ignoramus, a bigot, or a jackass?

[nico]

Beton,
Maybe you should start a thread about the changes/development in East Boston. If I knew how, I would. East Boston's got a lot going on now...Dumbo Jones might even be interested.

[DudeUrSistersHot]

I'd love to see a full-scale, world-class casino combined with Suffolk Downs at that location. Having a casino that close to the city combined with a rejuvenated Suffolk Downs would be a huge draw for the city.

My uncle (local entrepreneur/businessperson) grew up watching the races, loves horses, and now owns quite a few horses and a stable and such. He contributed a lot of money, time and support to his state senator due to his position on the Suffolk slot machines and the guy changed his mind because of pressure from the top. When my uncle found out what happened he drove down to the state house, barged into his office, and went absolutely ape-shit on the guy. It was hilarious. Having been to Suffolk Downs, I'd say it's worth saving.

[palindrome]

I was at suffolk downs the other day and won $14. Quite a good time it was.

[BostonSkyGuy]

I was at suffolk downs the other day and won $14. Quite a good time it was.

Now I know who to hit up when I need a loan.

[palindrome]

Lol, i was originally down $40 so i can't complain!

[nico]

Published 2007-07-13
Casino (battle) royale
Menino throws Hub?s hat in the ring as Middleborough talks stall

BOSTON. Mayor Thomas Menino yesterday called for a casino to be built at Suffolk Downs in East Boston, one day after talks to place one in Middleborough seemingly hit a snag.


?We need to look to the future of Suffolk Downs,? Menino said in a statement. ?I want to ensure that long-term job growth opportunities remain for the residents of Boston. A plan for slot machines alone is not enough.?

Earlier this week, the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe reacted unfavorably to the town of Middleborough?s demands for millions of additional dollars to support a casino, and lawyers for both the tribe and the town are set to meet today to resume negotiations. The town is also set to vote on the plan July 28.

While Menino has made no formal proposal for a casino, he told reporters yesterday morning he?d like to meet with the tribe about the idea. However, it?s unlikely the tribe would be able to build in Boston since federal mandate requires any casino be built within 50 miles of its home ? in this case, Mashpee.


But Menino?s spokeswoman Dot Joyce said the mayor is open to any opportunity that would move forward casino plans here. In addition, a Suffolk Downs spokesman said yesterday in a statement, ?Should the state move to expand gaming, we?d be open to discussing the benefits Suffolk Downs brings.?


The mayor?s push to bring casino gambling to Suffolk Downs ? which now offers the only thoroughbred horse racing facility in New England ? was met with mixed reactions from elected officials of East Boston.

The neighborhood?s city councilor, Sal LaMattina, said yesterday he supported increased gambling opportunities there. He said Bostonians are leaving the city every day to spend money at Connecticut?s casinos, and that one here would add important jobs and revenue.
?Not many people are going to see horses anymore, and I?d like to see that place stay open,? LaMattina said.


However, East Boston?s senator on Beacon Hill, Anthony Petruccelli, called any casino plans for Suffolk Downs premature. Petruccelli said while he?s a supporter of slot machines at the racetrack, he is ?concerned with going beyond that.?

Greg St. Martin

[JimboJones]

My understanding is that over the past decade, if not longer, the local horse and dog tracks have received millions of dollars in handouts from the state, in order to keep them up and running.

Now, they are facing a goldmine.

Are they gonna pay back the money?

[tobyjug]

Yesterday's MassCap was a pleasant outing. The attendance looked good, and the age of the attendees was diverse. It was dressy enough for one of the regulars to complain "it looks like the Kentucky Derby out here". Current ownership has made an effort to spruce the place up, and the purse was high enough so that you weren't watching dog meat.
While I could easily imagine slots in the lower level of the facility, I had trouble picturing a resort casino there. On the other hand, while waiting in line Friday at the parking clerk window in the basement of City Hall, I could easily imagine that place as a casino. Labyrinthine, absence of natural light, lots of pointless space, money flying out of your pocket...

[TheRifleman]

What do you all think the chances are that nothing ever get developed of any significance on the Greenway for at least the next 5-6 years? I think it's pretty high.

You might be 100% right. Don't worry we can all start to focus on East Boston Casino's that should be positive development while East Boston & Revere end up becoming poverty stricten. Are our reps really that GREEDY and STUPID?

[Beton Brut]

Don't worry we can all start to focus on East Boston Casino's that should be positive development while East Boston & Revere end up becoming poverty stricken.

Over my dead body.

Are our reps really that GREEDY and STUPID?

As a lifelong resident of the Orient Heights neighborhood and an informed observer of our political landscape, I have come to believe that the only reason my elected officials took interest in public office is that they're too stupid to engage in organized crime. Just ask this guy (http://wbztv.com/local/john.forbes.resigns.2.1389699.html)...

[GW2500]

^^ Are you against a potential casino at Suffolk downs? Would you say your neighborhood is generally for or against it?

[Beton Brut]

^^ Are you against a potential casino at Suffolk downs?

Staunchly against.

Some thoughts here (http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=36561&postcount=3), and here (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=34265&highlight=casino#post34265), and here (http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=59016&postcount=3).

Would you say your neighborhood is generally for or against it?

This is a bit hard to quantify. I'm a bit of an aberration in my neighborhood. It was my good fortune to have generous parents who made sure I received a good education. I've been lucky to travel a bit and see the wider world. I read and write and think. I'm no prude, but I just don't see this working to the benefit of the community where my family's roots have been for nearly a century.

I don't imagine anyone in my neighborhood (or surrounding communities) with an IQ north of room temperature who sees this as a the best and highest use of the Suffolk Downs site. Unfortunately, the promise of money all too often trumps reason.

[GW2500]

^^^ So it seems your main reason your against it is lack of adaquate infastructure. Driving there is a mess I agree, I went to the hot dog saffari once. But if enough infastructure improvements are part of the package would you still be very against it?

[Beton Brut]

They'd need to put six to eight lanes of blacktop from Neptune Road in East Boston to the New Hampshire border. I think it's safe to assume that that's not happening.

And also, I think the good people of East Boston, Revere, Winthrop, Chelsea, and Everett have enough to deal with in the way of "malignant land use." If the land-owners wanted to put 10,000 units of mixed-income housing, or a movie studio, or labs for biotech or pharma, I'd be all for it.

Taking a larger view (economic and socioeconomic) casino gambling will not be the budgetary panacea that some on Beacon Hill believe it to be. If they build it and it fails to generate the promised tax revenue (and a profit for its investors) I don't want my neighborhood to be left holding the bag.

Make sense?

[JohnAKeith]

I recommend you all run for office, then. You have two weeks before the April 27 deadline to collect 150 signatures to get on this fall's MA State Representative ballot. Then you can argue against the casinos in a public forum.

[GW2500]

This probably needs a new thread, ( I went back 6 pages and couldn't find anything for suffolk downs **.) I hear what your saying, but I opptimistically think if done right, it could maybe extend Boston (what people think of when they think of boston) to East Boston. B/c right now its no different than Everett. Sure I love Santarpios, but besides that I have no reason to go to Eastie.

And it has a lot a great things going for it, near the Harbor (but unfortuanetly not on the water), real close to the airport (super easy for acts to come in and out),a subway line stop, close to highways (but most certainly roads would have to be improved), and real close to downtown Boston, a great American city. Also it would have horse racing and be near Revere beach, which still might be nice one day. Those are a lot of perks. I suppose it would create a few more degenerates, but those people already exist as do bookies and drugies. It could only add to Boston's entertainment/nightlife scene, which could still be enhanced.




**Actually I recomend people go back a few pages and look at all the proposed developments for Boston. There was a lot, I forgot about a lot of these. I'd like to think some of these might have updates, a lot are probably dead in the water though.

[KentXie]

^^^ So it seems your main reason your against it is lack of adaquate infastructure. Driving there is a mess I agree, I went to the hot dog saffari once. But if enough infastructure improvements are part of the package would you still be very against it?

I'm somewhat against it because crime tend to be a side effect of casinos in an urban environment. It's a double edged sword. While it does provide revenue for the city, I'm afraid of those chronic gamblers who would gamble their life away which may result in the rise of the homeless.

[kmp1284]

I'm afraid of those chronic gamblers who would gamble their life away which may result in the rise of the homeless.

That's their problem. Let them do so; free up some cheap-o apartments for working, contributing citizens.

[singbat]

That's their problem. Let them do so; free up some cheap-o apartments for working, contributing citizens.

Seriously?

Gambling is essentially a license to run a private tax on the population. Granted an opt-in tax, but come on, is this really what we want commerce in the Commonwealth to be about?

If money is so tight and raising new revenue is the only answer, perhaps we could come up with an income source that has a long-term net positive impact on the local economy.

With gambling we get crime, personal crisis, and dead-end jobs.

Worse than that, gambling siphons capital out of the productive sectors of the economy -- it distorts the economy towards what the Econs call "rent seeking behavior".

We'd be better off with sweatshops in an export processing zone -- perhaps that way we'd eventually get high-speed trains and new superhighways too... probably not, but what we get with gambling is a dead certainty: a whole lot of nothing good.

[GW2500]

I suppose all of you are right about the negative aspect of gambling, I don't deny that it would atleast increase some self inflicted problems in our region. But to be harsh, until we can protect the victims of all non-self-inflicted problems in society, I have little time for the ones who choose to fuck up.



Also it's important to note that bookies have been in the area forever. I've known a few who got in too deep. Also drug addiction and prostitution have been here for a long time too. So I guess I'm saying these vices already exist in Mass. As for the economy I don't think 2 casinos will change the landscape of economics in MA. And really I think it's the glitz and glamor that is the double edged sword, at least in regards to drug addiction. All and all I think Boston need's more of it (glitz), even at the price of a few people falling to the dark side. Like a pimp, NYC turns a lot of people out, but you love it anywase. Common sense tells you to not jump infront of train, it also tells you to not gamble your life away. Those who don't have it are predisposed to fail in life and I'm not sure there is much you can do about that. If they don't fuck up this way, they will find another way.

And finally CT seems to be the same state it's allways been. It certainly hasn't gone to hell in a hand basket.

[Boston02124]

I like ur way of thinking^

[GW2500]

Thanks, in a world of 7 billion, where there are millions of victims, and millions of perpetrators, one must get macro and prioritize.
IMO a Casino would be sucessful and do more good than harm. If the two in CT (with not much around them) can bring in crowds, how can one with more amenities, attractions, and people near by not? I guess I just like the idea of Boston adding more VIP and high-roller-ness into the mix. And even if it fails, how is that different than a big company going out of business? You would want any other big company to come into town and try to be sucesful. If shit happens then you deal with it then and eventually redevlop. But if Boston really wants to retain the young profesionals we need to be less sleepy and offer even more adult entertainment.

[choo]

I hate when people say its a "tax". It is taxed, like nearly everything, and since it is an activity with more direct negative consequences, it is more heavily taxed. People do it because they enjoy it, people go out to restaurants, theatres, ballgames, and there is a tax, but no one calls Sox tickets a baseball tax. So to me that argument is bogus.

Casinos, i believe like all things, have a place in which they can healthily contribute to a community. Las Vegas, AC have no surrounding economy. Gambling is the only industry. In a infinitely more vibrant, diversified economy, it will just be one of many. As someone that does not gamble (but is going to Vegas shortly) i will go to the casino because of the improved horse racing entertainment acts.

And for the argument that it will take away from other tourist or local businesses, I don't really by it. Does anyone ever say that development on the seaport will take away from downtown, or will it add to it. I think casinos will just be one of many attractions in what is a diverse city to explore.

[Shepard]

Has anyone been to the casino in Montreal? I'm curious to know how that interacts with or contributes to the urban environment...

[kennedy]

There's a casino in downtown St. Louis, attached to a Four Seasons hotel. Relatively upscale, and you rarely see too much crime happening around the casino itself. Perhaps that's because St. Louis has far greater crime problems, but who knows? I can tell you one thing, this particular casino does absolutely nothing for the urban environment - this is not to say that a casino can't, though.

Maybe casinos are a bad idea, but would smaller "gambling parlors"
be more acceptable? Perhaps restaurants with poker tables, or sports bars with official bookies? This may or may not inspire back room dealing and grimy gambling, but I think it's an interesting, urban alternative to the casino.

[Ron Newman]

We already have Keno parlors, and they are a blight to whatever neighborhood they are located in.

[GW2500]

The safest part of Detroit is it's casino. But kind of like Kennedy said since the rest of the city is basically 3rd world it's tough to gauge.

[armpitsOFmight]

Some of you people are being retarded; gambling can be urban. Just look at the pachinko parlors in Tokyo and Osaka. They blend in everywhere.

[singbat]

And for the argument that it will take away from other tourist or local businesses, I don't really by it. Does anyone ever say that development on the seaport will take away from downtown, or will it add to it. I think casinos will just be one of many attractions in what is a diverse city to explore.

Gambling doesn't create value. compare to a producer, e.g. a manufacturing or software firm. Gambling moves money from one pocket to another; whereas, the producer is creating new value -- money that didn't exist before.

Because gambling doesn't create new money it has to take money from net savings. The people who spend on gambling presumably still pay the rent and buy food, so they must save less.

With less savings piling up in local banks there is less of a need/ability for those banks to make loans to generate earnings. Since banks lend 10X every dollar on hand, the gambler's reduction in savings of, say, $1,000 becomes $10,000 less investment in local business, some of which would be producer businesses.

With less money going to producers there is less new money coming into the state -- the MA balance of trade deteriorates. That deterioration causes its own lowering of savings and therefore further lessening of investment.

I'm not saying the sky will fall if we allow gambling in MA. What I'm saying is that is the wrong direction for the state. It is a path of incremental badness at the margin that only gets worse over time. Why would we want to start down that road just to get a sugar rush of short-term revenue?

You can tell a similar story about gambling's effect on the skills of the workforce and the impact on decision-making at the state level (politics in shorthand), both of which are also negatively effected. And if you'll take my word for it on the workforce skills, you can see that playing in to the investment problem i just talked about since employers will see a lowering of investment at the same time that skilled labor gets incrementally more expensive.

Unless your long-term project is turning Boston into Vegas or Macao, this is not a way to make Boston competitive or prosperous and it won't even make people want to come here for the entertainment value since the competition is too great for Boston to compete on anything more than convenience -- and that would be yet another kind of mediocrity we don't need.

What i'm saying is, gambling is not a small question and it doesn't in the long-run have anything to do with individual preferences. What any of us like or don't like in terms of entertainment or crime is immaterial when placed beside the long-term health of the economy and whether or not our children will be able to stay in MA and get high paying jobs at world-class companies and/or at the local companies that grow up around them.

[tobyjug]

Has anyone been to the casino in Montreal? I'm curious to know how that interacts with or contributes to the urban environment...

Often.

It was built as the French pavilion for Expo 67. Architecturally, while interesting in and of itself, the casino adds nothing since it sits on an island on the St. Lawrence and is somewhat remote from the city center. As to the "urban environment", it is an amenity in that many find it to be an attraction.

The casino has a dress code, is maintained to a good standard, and has a "casino within a casino" for those who prefer a smaller crowd.

[tobyjug]

Some of you people are being retarded; gambling can be urban. Just look at the pachinko parlors in Tokyo and Osaka. They blend in everywhere.

Also, the casino in Monte Carlo is urban and urbane as these things go, and there are also plenty of private gambling clubs in London.

Regrettably, crude local politicians will retail casino licenses to their chums, who will set up Kmart style operations.

[erikyow]

The Canadian provinces of Ontario and, in particular, Qu?bec are models of how casinos can be run. Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation runs a few casinos throughout the province, however they have opted to put the casinos away from the larger urban areas, but do operate slot parlours at racetracks and the like in places like suburban Toronto and Ottawa. Furthermore, the OLG licenses casinos elsewhere, like those in Niagara Falls and Windsor.

Loto-Qu?bec, on the other hand, has created destinations in places like the Charlevoix, Lac-Leamy (Gatineau/Ottawa) and Mont-Tremblant, in addtion to the Casino de Montr?al. These locations feature excellent hotels and are located in areas with other activities - Lac-Leamy located in the National Capital Region; the Charlevoix region is a well-known getaway region for Qu?b?cois and used to be the haunting grounds of the American aristocracy, like the Roosevelts; Mont-Tremblant is known for its ski resort and the base village with lots of restaurants and other activities.

Furthermore, the casinos in both Ontario and Qu?bec are run by the provincial lottery agencies so any profits are then put back into social services and local funding as well as funding gambling addiction programs. Furthermore, the casinos strive to be good neighbours, funding many community programs in the regions where they are located.

As state-run organizations, you also eliminate much of the associated crime that can associate gambling.

I'm pretty neutral on the idea of casinos in Massachusetts. I can see the pros and cons. Just trying to illustrate that there are some options that exist that can minimize some of the social stigmas that can be associated with legalized gambling.

[JohnAKeith]

So, does anyone know for sure, what does this mean for the Indian reservation casinos? If they can get federal recognition, they can still build, right? In addition to any state-authorized casinos.

[choo]

Gambling doesn't create value. compare to a producer, e.g. a manufacturing or software firm. Gambling moves money from one pocket to another; whereas, the producer is creating new value -- money that didn't exist before.

Because gambling doesn't create new money it has to take money from net savings. The people who spend on gambling presumably still pay the rent and buy food, so they must save less.

With less savings piling up in local banks there is less of a need/ability for those banks to make loans to generate earnings. Since banks lend 10X every dollar on hand, the gambler's reduction in savings of, say, $1,000 becomes $10,000 less investment in local business, some of which would be producer businesses.



These types of argument make me angry, because they center on issues that are only brought up in the issue of gambling. "Gambling does not produce money."- this is absolutely correct. It is a form of entertainment, and it must be budgeted by each individual like every other form of entertainment. When a new restaurant or retail store opens up and sells shirts made in malaysia, is it creating wealth here? When you go bowling, or to the movies, do you create wealth from a producer? No, you pay for entertainment and the services done by the staff on site (i.e. local jobs) that these people invest in an economy.

Yes, gambling takes money from people that freely hand it over, just like people a restaurant does. People will always find ways to throw away their money and get in debt. I would be willing to bet more people do it buying clothes they can't afford than gambling money they dont have.

[kennedy]

Ha...pun.

[singbat]

These types of argument make me angry, because they center on issues that are only brought up in the issue of gambling. "Gambling does not produce money."- this is absolutely correct. It is a form of entertainment, and it must be budgeted by each individual like every other form of entertainment. When a new restaurant or retail store opens up and sells shirts made in malaysia, is it creating wealth here? When you go bowling, or to the movies, do you create wealth from a producer? No, you pay for entertainment and the services done by the staff on site (i.e. local jobs) that these people invest in an economy.

Yes, gambling takes money from people that freely hand it over, just like people a restaurant does. People will always find ways to throw away their money and get in debt. I would be willing to bet more people do it buying clothes they can't afford than gambling money they dont have.

Just keep in mind, I'm arguing that gambling is a counter-productive way to address the need for state revenues and economic growth.

I'm definitely not suggesting that we need regulatory change in favor or against clothing stores or restaurants! I would not vote to in some way expand the number of restaurants per capita, for instance.

Also keep in mind that one of the reasons we, in general, don't worry about importing clothing is that as a polity we don't see textiles as the future of the US economy. Vis-a-vis foreign markets, the US has advanced to compete in high tech products, high tech manufactures, high-value added services and capital-intensive commodities.

I'm not sure we want to re-orient that trajectory to include more roulette tables in what we see as our future competitive advantage... would be a shame for the most competitive economy in the nation with the highest venture capital and patents per capita to aim so low!

[jass]

This is the last casino I went to. I dont see any blight.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/jamesinclair/IMG_4695.jpg

[choo]

I'm not sure we want to re-orient that trajectory to include more roulette tables in what we see as our future competitive advantage... would be a shame for the most competitive economy in the nation with the highest venture capital and patents per capita to aim so low!

I think our disagreement is one of scope. I don't advocate turning massachusetts into las vegas. I don't think 2 casinos will have this affect. Two casinos does not mean that the state will no longer invest in its public education, or work to enhance and promote the next big biotech or energy or financial or whatever innovative business to come out of one of our many world renowned universities. I don't believe in ten years we will have a state of degenerate gamblers and a bunch of empty office towers (at least not because of black jack at suffolk downs.) I believe that working people who do not have the advanced degree to win millions from one of the many venture capital firms in the state will have the opportunity at a good paying job providing an entertaining service for other residents who currently drive to the woods in connecticut for such things.

[singbat]

I think our disagreement is one of scope. I don't advocate turning massachusetts into las vegas. I don't think 2 casinos will have this affect. Two casinos does not mean that the state will no longer invest in its public education, or work to enhance and promote the next big biotech or energy or financial or whatever innovative business to come out of one of our many world renowned universities. I don't believe in ten years we will have a state of degenerate gamblers and a bunch of empty office towers (at least not because of black jack at suffolk downs.) I believe that working people who do not have the advanced degree to win millions from one of the many venture capital firms in the state will have the opportunity at a good paying job providing an entertaining service for other residents who currently drive to the woods in connecticut for such things.

Fair enough. In a way I'm not arguing w/you so much as ticked off that the Commonwealth doesn't (maybe also) do something more to push the competitiveness envelope as part of the reaction to crisis.

Last time we got good and hurt we hired Michael Porter to tell us which way was up -- this time we seem to be pretty damn certain that economic salvation has something to do w/betting.

What genius told us that?

[riffgo]

Look, at the very least, the establishment of some legal casino gambling in Massachusetts will help to stem the flow of local money to Connecticut, AC, and LV. It might also stimulate spending from out-of-staters (from ME, NH, etc.) who would find it more convenient then travelling to the other gambling destinations.

[tocoto]

Probably already been said...build the casino near the new convention center as part of a an entertainment district with later closing hours for clubs and bring in money from out of star conventioneers.

[KentXie]

This is the last casino I went to. I dont see any blight.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/jamesinclair/IMG_4695.jpg

How close to a dense neighborhood is this casino located at?

[Beton Brut]

^^ And how close to the 38th Parallel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Demilitarized_Zone) is this casino?

[joebos]

That casino photo is really weird. It looks like an abandoned hotel or something.

[bostonbred]

it NOT the weird foto. It bOSTon Glob mockup of RFK GRENSWAY.

[ablarc]

^^ And how close to the 38th Parallel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Demilitarized_Zone) is this casino?
Why do totalitarian countries like to put their soldiers in jodhpurs?

Like they just took part in a horse show.

[Beton Brut]

It's a good question...

My dad claims that the Nazis stole their uniforms from the Massachusetts State Police.

[tobyjug]

"Do you enjoy going to work every day looking like you are going to invade Poland?"

[ablarc]

Funny picture of some goofy guys dressed up in jodhpurs, medals and uniforms. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hitler_1928_crop.jpg) The fella in the picture's dead center forgot his uniform.

[statler]

I think I detect a patton (http://melissaphillips.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/patton1.jpg).

[ablarc]

^ By George, you're right.

[BosDevelop]

I don't understand the anti-casino viewpoint in Massachusetts for two reasons:

1) We already have numerous legal ways for Massachusetts citizens to gamble. Why is a scratch ticket ok but a hand of blackjack is not? Why is the lottery ok but pulling a slot machine is not? What's next, beer and wine are ok but no more hard liquor?

2) how can the anti-casino folks continue to argue against casinos when the facts are that Massachusetts residents are spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year in other New England casinos? This is not going to stop. Why should we let Connecticut and Rhode Island reap all the benefits when Massachusetts citizens make the decision to spend their money at casinos? I am sick of seeing all this money go south simply because people think one form of gambling is more ethical or moral than others or one form of gambling will cause social problems more than others. Sorry folks but no form of gambling in this state will ever have as many adverse effects as scratch tickets, keno and lottery numbers.

[Beton Brut]

Why is a scratch ticket ok but a hand of blackjack is not? Why is the lottery ok but pulling a slot machine is not?

A casual knowledge of abnormal psychology would clarify the difference.

2) how can the anti-casino folks continue to argue against casinos when the facts are that Massachusetts residents are spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year in other New England casinos? This is not going to stop...

To be clear, the residents of East Boston, Revere and abutting communities who oppose this type of development at Suffolk Downs (and/or Wonderland) are more concerned with additional strain on existing highway infrastructure than grandma blowing her Social Security check at the craps table.

In considering the wider social implications, has it occurred to you that the impact of an expanded palate of gambling opportunities may lead to an unintended financial impact on social programs? I believe people need to take responsibility for themselves and their families. Inevitably, some people will behave irresponsibly. Who pays for that? Not the casino owners...

[palindrome]

Went to Twin River last weekend. Broke even and hit up the all you can eat KFC buffet.

[tobyjug]

Did James Bond and Le Chiffre go for the Original Recipe or the Extra Crispy?

[briv]

Legalizing casino gambling for budgetary reasons just reeks of desperation. I also find it unseemly that my state views human weakness as a fantastic generator of precious, precious new revenue.

[Justin7]

Can someone show me a casino in an urban environment that isn't surrounded by blight?

[Ron Newman]

I recall seeing one in Amsterdam, located quite unobtrusively in the Leidseplein.

[Shepard]

I also find it unseemly that my state views human weakness as a fantastic generator of precious, precious new revenue.

Some states/locales bet their entire economies on rising home prices and continuing speculation. With human folly being a sure-fire winning wager, is our state wrong for stacking its chips there?

[GW2500]

It's been said, but remember 2 casinos, IMO, will not change economics in Mass. And more importantly than the revenue it will create are the jobs it will create. Some good paying college education required jobs. The rest will be jobs for people who don't have that much of an education. It's important to recognize that these people exist, allways have allways will, and they need jobs too. Not everyone can spend 100 - 350K for an education and they're arn't enough scholarships to go around.

[portnorfolk]

Can someone show me a casino in an urban environment that isn't surrounded by blight?

monaco/monte carlo. for your shaken martini, of course. what is strange though is Monaco's own citizens are not allowed to gamble in the casinos. And no income tax. How perfect is that!

[palindrome]

Did James Bond and Le Chiffre go for the Original Recipe or the Extra Crispy?

They both skipped the buffet and got Double Downs (http://www.kfc.com/doubledown/). :p

[Shepard]

The colonel is a cynical sadist who preys on the obese and the ig'nant.

[Beton Brut]

The colonel is a cynical sadist who preys on the obese and the ig'nant.

We could say something similar about our state legislature.

[Shepard]

Then you're all for getting rid of the lottery too, right?

Oh wait, I forgot; the lottery doesn't bring cars onto your local highway.

[Beton Brut]

It's not all about me, Shepard. It's about the tens of thousands of people who live in the communities that will be adversely impacted if they build out the Suffolk Downs site like Foxwoods of Mohegan Sun.

And do you not see a difference between dropping $10 on some scratch tickets at the White Hen and blowing a week's pay at a casino?

[Shepard]

I do understand why residential communities wouldn't want a casino nearby. Like sewage treatment plants, casinos are one of the very legitimate nimby concerns. But I don't think the argument should be couched in terms of ethical concerns, "people blowing a week's pay" ... those who want to gamble most likely already do - whether online, in CT, or cladestinely. Maybe some people's lives will get worse from proximity to it. But people's lives also get worse from proximity to KFCs that serve Double Downs. We can't always protect people from themselves, especially when the means of hurting themselves through gambling are so easily available anyway.

Also, while I understand the economic argument that casinos don't add new productive value to a region, I don't buy it. In a vacuum, yes - it's true that a casino itself mearly collects economic rents. But within the broader ecosystem, it does add value. How? By adding more diversity to entertainment options - making the city more competitive when it comes to attracting and retaining young talent. By growing more tourism, increasing the dollars flowing to restaurants, hotels, and non-gaming attractions. (And yes, a transit-accessible casino will tip the scales in favor of Boston for some tourists deciding where to vacation.)

But back to the nimby point. I do think that Eastie is the wrong place. Why has the seaport not been seriously considered? No residents to speak of, thousands of conventioneers, nothing else getting built... I know I'm hardly the first on this board to mention it, but I'm really truly wondering why this isn't on the table.

[palindrome]

But back to the nimby point. I do think that Eastie is the wrong place. Why has the seaport not been seriously considered? No residents to speak of, thousands of conventioneers, nothing else getting built... I know I'm hardly the first on this board to mention it, but I'm really truly wondering why this isn't on the table.'


Simple....because it isn't in DeLeo's district.

[Beton Brut]

I do understand why residential communities wouldn't want a casino nearby. Like sewage treatment plants, casinos are one of the very legitimate nimby concerns.

Winthrop already has one of those (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deer_Island_Waste_Water_Treatment_Plant). On a similar note, Logan is widely recognized as an economic engine for the entire region -- twenty-six million passengers every year (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_International_Airport). That's a lot of guests in my neighborhood, and none of them stopped by my place with a six-pack and a pizza. Maybe we don't need anyone else stopping by...

But I don't think the argument should be couched in terms of ethical concerns, "people blowing a week's pay" ... those who want to gamble most likely already do - whether online, in CT, or cladestinely.

That's fair. And I agree in spirit, but then there's reality:
I believe people need to take responsibility for themselves and their families. Inevitably, some people will behave irresponsibly. Who pays for that? Not the casino owners...

Maybe some people's lives will get worse from proximity to it. But people's lives also get worse from proximity to KFCs that serve Double Downs.

As a direct result of gambling, or due to some other aspect of the facilities operation?

I do think that Eastie is the wrong place.

The words "resort" and "oil tank farm" don't really belong in the same sentence.

Why has the seaport not been seriously considered? No residents to speak of, thousands of conventioneers, nothing else getting built...I know I'm hardly the first on this board to mention it, but I'm really truly wondering why this isn't on the table.

That's a political question. The legacy of the Brothers Bulger is still strong there. In my experience, Southie gets what Southie wants. Logic would tell you that the Seaport is its own thing, but brother, it's Southie.

[GW2500]

^^ You make good points, I still respectfully disagree on some things. All and all Deer Island is a nice walk.

[Beton Brut]

All and all Deer Island is a nice walk.

I agree. That said, sometimes, it smells like the circus out there.

[GW2500]

Yea I imagine sometimes 10 story stacks of shit can stink. I guess everytime I've been there the wind was blowing out to sea.

[tobyjug]

Some states/locales bet their entire economies on rising home prices and continuing speculation.

Some countries too, e.g. Iceland and Ireland.

[BosDevelop]

And do you not see a difference between dropping $10 on some scratch tickets at the White Hen and blowing a week's pay at a casino?

You are clearly blinded by your anti-casino position if you cannot recognize that the vast majority of scratch ticket players don't just "drop $10 on some scratch tickets at White Hen." These folks are spending a hell of a lot more than just $10 every few days. Many of them buy several of the $5-$10 tickets at a time.

But go ahead and keep thinking that casino players will blow a weeks pay while scratch ticket players merely throw down the occasional ten spot.

I can't believe intelligent people actually think that casinos will have more adverse effects on Massachusetts' citizens than our current lottery games have. To those people I suggest spending some time in a convenience store, packy or keno parlor in a lower income area. The problems are already there. Casinos are not going to make them significantly worse.

[KentXie]

You are clearly blinded by your anti-casino position if you cannot recognize that the vast majority of scratch ticket players don't just "drop $10 on some scratch tickets at White Hen." These folks are spending a hell of a lot more than just $10 every few days. Many of them buy several of the $5-$10 tickets at a time.

But go ahead and keep thinking that casino players will blow a weeks pay while scratch ticket players merely throw down the occasional ten spot.

I can't believe intelligent people actually think that casinos will have more adverse effects on Massachusetts' citizens than our current lottery games have. To those people I suggest spending some time in a convenience store, packy or keno parlor in a lower income area. The problems are already there. Casinos are not going to make them significantly worse.

Actually, I'm pretty sure it is not a vast majority and even so, I'm am sure that people would lose more money at a casino than at a scratch ticket. I draw all this from my cousin's experience who once lived in Las Vegas. The first thing they noticed when they lived there was that there were a huge number of beggars and homeless people, much greater than the city of Boston. So yes, there is a possibility that casino can make things significantly worse.

[statler]

I don't have a dog in fight (I'm officially on the fence about the whole thing) but I thought this was interesting (http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/04/nh_warily_eyes.html).

[Shepard]

Kent, I don't think that's a fair parallel. Vegas is a gambling mecca - and an economy based on gaming -in a way which Boston will never, ever, be; as such it attracts the desperate, the already homeless, and the gambling addicts. I'd wager that the vast majority of homeless people in Vegas were not hardworking cactus farmers one day, and the next day, after the casino moved in, penniless and sleeping in a ditch.

[Beton Brut]

You are clearly blinded by your anti-casino position if you cannot recognize that the vast majority of scratch ticket players don't just "drop $10 on some scratch tickets at White Hen." These folks are spending a hell of a lot more than just $10 every few days. Many of them buy several of the $5-$10 tickets at a time.

I've observed this behavior. The compulsion is similar, but the atmosphere is a bit different. Casinos are engineered to remove as much money from the guest as possible; convenience stores are only a point-of-sale for the lottery.

But go ahead and keep thinking that casino players will blow a weeks pay while scratch ticket players merely throw down the occasional ten spot.

I have a close friend who'd bet his last dollar on a cockroach race. My great-uncle was a prosperous bookmaker in East Boston. My mom, in her late seventies, loves 3-card poker. I won a bunch of money on Gonzaga in 1999. I know a little bit about gambling in all its forms.

I can't believe intelligent people actually think that casinos will have more adverse effects on Massachusetts' citizens than our current lottery games have...The problems are already there. Casinos are not going to make them significantly worse.

Wanna bet?

[kennedy]

monaco/monte carlo. for your shaken martini, of course. what is strange though is Monaco's own citizens are not allowed to gamble in the casinos. And no income tax. How perfect is that!

Not only that, but one of their two colleges is almost entirely focused on training citizens for jobs within the casino. I represented Monaco at a Model UN conference, once. Good time, I managed to pass a resolution by offering each delegate who voted in my favor a weekend retreat at Monte Carlo.

Like Statler, I've got no horse in the race. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. On the one hand, I like the idea of all the potential development a casino could bring. I'd like to see a compromise - and anything even close to Monte Carlo would absolutely make me ecstatic. Of course - the entire model of Monte Carlo is different from American casinos. They are entirely focused on that one casino, whereas a casino would mostly be a side project here. I have a feeling that the only type of casino that would truly be socially "safe" would be a luxury one, it's very hard to imagine a "regular" casino that would be a positive contribution to an urban environment.

[KentXie]

I'm technically not entirely against it. I guess you can say, if the bill does not pass I will be happy with it, and if a casino goes through then I don't really care.

[singbat]

1) We already have numerous legal ways for Massachusetts citizens to gamble. Why is a scratch ticket ok but a hand of blackjack is not? Why is the lottery ok but pulling a slot machine is not? What's next, beer and wine are ok but no more hard liquor?

For many of the same reasons I've given, but in different measures, I'm fine w/we put a stop to scratch tickets and slots. You've got my vote.


2) how can the anti-casino folks continue to argue against casinos when the facts are that Massachusetts residents are spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year in other New England casinos? This is not going to stop. Why should we let Connecticut and Rhode Island reap all the benefits when Massachusetts citizens make the decision to spend their money at casinos? I am sick of seeing all this money go south simply because people think one form of gambling is more ethical or moral than others or one form of gambling will cause social problems more than others. Sorry folks but no form of gambling in this state will ever have as many adverse effects as scratch tickets, keno and lottery numbers.


So, maybe we should encourage MA businesses to kick start an import substitution drive so that we can stop sending our dollars overseas for our Asian-manufactured Nike duds?

I'm thinking not. Why would we want to run the clock back to the 1800s when the US was a textiles powerhouse? You agree? Same thing applies to casinos -- these are last century's dead-end jobs generating low-multiplier sycophantic revenues. Terrific if you want to be a world class prostitute like Vegas, Macau, and Monaco but not much of a consolation prize to the economy that invented the microcomputer, the telephone, radar, general anesthetic and Lego Mindstorms.

Let the damn money go south and let CT & RI specialize their economies to what is essentially part of the nail salon and tattoo parlor sector. We should be focusing on building our economy towards the future, not fighting for a share of what is now, or will soon be under the proposed scenario, a slowly deflating pie. It's not about stopping the loss, it's about focusing our attention on creating far more new wealth.

We're talking about businesses in CT & RI that are doing virtually nothing to bring high wage, high skill jobs to those economies. And w/o high skill, high wage jobs you don't get lower skill, high wage, or craftsman-skill, high wage jobs pulled through. Instead you get a declining tax base, an incrementally less effective workforce, greater cost to existing businesses, greater social problems in general, and all the specific negatives of the licensed highway robbery that is gambling. I.e. everyone loses.

You up for all that in exchange for a few acres of development in a low rent part of town? Cause I'm not.

Or was it the solid fiscal foundation that casinos are supposed to build for the state coffers according to the self-interested businessmen and short-term, next election is mine and devil take the hindmost thinking of our much vaunted state officials?

[palindrome]

with 2 casino's, i don't think we are exactly tailoring our economy towards gambling.

Ct has casinos, and is also in the top 3 wealthy states. Their economy isn't gambling.

We have been focusing our economy on the future. Perhaps you heard of the film tax credit? maybe the Life Sciences bill? Its not like we are ending all these and trying to convert MA into one of the nations top gaming destinations.

We already live with the social costs of gaming, yet are receiving 0 benefits. Twin river is a 50 minute drive, roughly what it would take me to get to Suffolk Downs give or take 10 minutes, and Foxwoods is only another 40 after that.

I could go either way on Casino's in MA, but some of you are making it seem like MA is going to explode into a detroit/AC if casinos are passed.

[GW2500]

I could also argue that for every one idiot dumb enough to gamble his life away and get thrown out on the street, another person can get a job and not get evicted. To me the greatest perk is the jobs it will create. Restuarants and hotels have plenty of dead end jobs, too. I don't hear anyone complain about them.

[Beton Brut]

I could go either way on Casino's in MA, but some of you are making it seem like MA is going to explode into a Detroit/AC if casinos are passed.

I'm not worried so much about the State. I'm plenty worried about my community.

[Shepard]

about my community.

So which is it, traffic or degenerates?

[Beton Brut]

So which is it, traffic or degenerates?

The lion's share of my concerns are about traffic, and its direct impact on the quality of life in the communities that surround Suffolk Downs. The current road infrastructure (in piss-poor condition) was overtaxed during the first Reagan administration. A casino on this site will only exacerbate the existing problems.

I also don't buy into the concept that casinos in Massachusetts will pull us out of our current fiscal mud-puddle, but that's just table-stakes.

I make no value-judgments about people who gamble, unless their conduct harms their family, and their ability to sustain themselves as functioning members of society.

[mass88]

The lion's share of my concerns are about traffic, and its direct impact on the quality of life in the communities that surround Suffolk Downs. The current road infrastructure (in piss-poor condition) was overtaxed during the first Reagan administration. A casino on this site will only exacerbate the existing problems.

I also don't buy into the concept that casinos in Massachusetts will pull us out of our current fiscal mud-puddle, but that's just table-stakes.

I make no value-judgments about people who gamble, unless their conduct harms their family, and their ability to sustain themselves as functioning members of society.

I am not looking at Casinos as a way to fix out state's budget, we need new leadership with brains to do that. But, I am looking at Casinos as keeping tax revenue in our state, and not CT or to a lesser extent LV and AC.

[Shepard]

Come on people. The revenue to the state is not what's at stake. More entertainment options to keep a young talented workforce is what this is about. Stodgy Boston must end if we want to stem the braindrain.

[BosDevelop]

We already live with the social costs of gaming, yet are receiving 0 benefits.

This is the most intelligent comment in this thread and the number 1 reason why I support two or so resort style casinos in Massachusetts (not necessarily Suffolk Downs but at least 1 casino somewhere in Eastern Massachusetts).

Also, I don't think anyone is this thread or even any of our state leaders are arguing that the addition of casinos will cure all of the state's economic problems. That is far from true. But we could really use the hundreds of millions that our residents are already spending in our border states to the south.

[palindrome]

I'm not worried so much about the State. I'm plenty worried about my community.

that is more than understandable and 100% a legitimate concern. I don't understand why the racetracks de facto get slot machines/full casino licenses in this bill. (Well, based on the bill's creator, i do)

They should, in fact, be auctioned off to the highest bidder. This would maximize state revenue the license auctions.

Somewhere in eastern MA would be ideal. Would make Boston a more attractive convention destination at the very least.

[Ron Newman]

I've never heard any of my 'young talented workforce' friends lament the lack of a casino in our local entertainment mix. We may be stodgy, but the way to fix that is to emulate Austin, not Las Vegas and Atlantic City.

[palindrome]

I've never heard any of my 'young talented workforce' friends lament the lack of a casino in our local entertainment mix. We may be stodgy, but the way to fix that is to emulate Austin, not Las Vegas and Atlantic City.

How about we emulate New Orleans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrah%27s_New_Orleans)?


Can we please stop comparing Vegas and AC to MA. It is an absurd comparison with really no merit what-so-ever. (Not specifically directed at you Ron. I have heard more than a handful of people make this argument on and off various boards.)

[singbat]

with 2 casino's, i don't think we are exactly tailoring our economy towards gambling.

Every piece of industrial policy is either good policy or bad policy. Casinos is crap industrial policy.

Ct has casinos, and is also in the top 3 wealthy states. Their economy isn't gambling.


CT is a bedroom community for Wall Street and that skews things a lot. Moreover, CT isn't doing so much high tech manufacture as it used to, so see my top point. (also see: http://www.allbusiness.com/north-america/united-states-connecticut/4060088-1.html)



We have been focusing our economy on the future. Perhaps you heard of the film tax credit? maybe the Life Sciences bill? Its not like we are ending all these and trying to convert MA into one of the nations top gaming destinations.


Good point. Let's see more of that!


I could go either way on Casino's in MA, but some of you are making it seem like MA is going to explode into a detroit/AC if casinos are passed.

Little known fact, MA is one of the most conservative states in the nation. Big surprise we react strongly to gambling.

[GW2500]

I'm 100% for this state becoming even less puritan. This sin will help. I guess I don't need it at Suffolk Downs, it's just I like the idea of a casino and a horse race track.

[gooseberry]

I went to the casino in New Orleans in 2004. It was so depressing, my brother and I walked in one end and out the other.

[palindrome]

Every piece of industrial policy is either good policy or bad policy. Casinos is crap industrial policy.

Is it industrial policy or entertainment policy? The industrial side certainly wouldn't benefit mass as there are no slot machine producers, computer manufacturers etc etc...really probably nothing used for building/stocking the casinos would be made in MA.

However, in terms of entertainment, I see casinos as making MA a more attractive place to do business, hold conventions and retain young, qualified college grads.


CT is a bedroom community for Wall Street and that skews things a lot. Moreover, CT isn't doing so much high tech manufacture as it used to, so see my top point. (also see: http://www.allbusiness.com/north-america/united-states-connecticut/4060088-1.html)

very good point indeed. Still, the casinos produce about $400m in taxes for the state though.

I honestly wonder how much of that comes from MA residents, and how much our state pays to help gamblers.


Good point. Let's see more of that!

Absolutely agree!


Little known fact, MA is one of the most conservative states in the nation. Big surprise we react strongly to gambling.

I have always found it funny that MA can be both such a progressive state (gay marriage, health care) and at the same time be such a prudent state (no liquor at grocery stores etc....)

I can say for myself, one of the main reasons i support casinos is the personal freedom. I don't need a nanny state telling me what to do, but this all needs to be balanced with what those in the host communities desire. I can respect the fact that communities do not want a casino located in their cities/towns, and that should override my personal desires, especially in lieu that there isn't a casino being proposed in my town.

At the end of the day, I most certainly respect the argument you are making. You make some good points. Again, I could go either way on Casinos in MA, but i am enjoying this dialogue hearing from both sides. Its much more than you hear in the news. :)

I probably make little sense in any of these posts, its still early, and i need another cop of coffee.

[JohnAKeith]

Interesting way of thinking of this:

The state won't collect 25 percent of money gambled at the casinos in taxes, it will collect 25 percent of the money LOST by people gambling.

How can anyone in good conscience support this?

[BostonUrbEx]

Interesting way of thinking of this:

The state won't collect 25 percent of money gambled at the casinos in taxes, it will collect 25 percent of the money LOST by people gambling.

How can anyone in good conscience support this?

The "lost" money doesn't go into a hole and get burned and burried. It goes back into the economy. It's going to pay employees, pay other companies contracted by the casino (landscapers, etc, unless they're doing it themselves and it goes right to employees), it goes in to food distributors, it goes towards construction companies, etc.

I don't see how real money is ever lost without being physically destroyed.

EDIT: No, I don't like the idea of a casino at Suffolk Downs, just seems like a bad spot. And I support the idea of a couple casinos in MA. I'm not pushing for it, but I'm not against it.

[ant8904]

The "lost" money doesn't go into a hole and get burned and burried. It goes back into the economy. It's going to pay employees, pay other companies contracted by the casino (landscapers, etc, unless they're doing it themselves and it goes right to employees), it goes in to food distributors, it goes towards construction companies, etc.

I don't see how real money is ever lost without being physically destroyed.

EDIT: No, I don't like the idea of a casino at Suffolk Downs, just seems like a bad spot. And I support the idea of a couple casinos in MA. I'm not pushing for it, but I'm not against it.


If you put it like that... does that mean it is a redistribution of wealth? By my understanding, gambling is a zero-sum game, you don't "create" money like other things. It just a way to get people to spend (and in this case, majority lose with a few winners or the house) which the state get a piece.

The money is not lost, but nothing is being created, and the money is going to move from one group to another. This may give some concern of where it is moving from...

[palindrome]

It is absolutely a redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich. With that said, I certainly enjoy gambling.

[GW2500]

Some of that money collected goes to pay for workers paychecks. It allows individuals make a living. With their paychecks they can pay rent, buy groceries, contribute to their local economy. That is not economic nothingness, it lets people support themselves, thats a good thing. And if anything I'd say it is more of rich giving there money away, not the poor.

[kennedy]

Is "wealth redistribution" a taboo word (phrase) now, the same way "socialism" is?

Ant, by your argument, any form of entertainment is essentially "redistribution of wealth."

[ablarc]

Isn't all commerce wealth redistribution?

[tobyjug]

...with a view toward concentration.

[BosDevelop]

Interesting way of thinking of this:

The state won't collect 25 percent of money gambled at the casinos in taxes, it will collect 25 percent of the money LOST by people gambling.

How can anyone in good conscience support this?

once again, scratch tickets, lotto numbers keno, horse racing = ok

casino gambling = bad


I just don't get it and I think my "beer/wine ok, hard liquor = not ok" analogy from earlier in the thread is on point.

[GW2500]

^^ Or even just the sale of alcohol. There is not a doubt in my mind that alcohol is more detrimental to society than gambling.

[Boston02124]

ditto!^

[Justin7]

once again, scratch tickets, lotto numbers keno, horse racing = ok

casino gambling = bad


I just don't get it and I think my "beer/wine ok, hard liquor = not ok" analogy from earlier in the thread is on point.

There are many, many alcoholics who drink only beer. Not many gambling addicts only play the lottery. Or rather, if you want to call lottery players addicts, they are still only losing a few dollars a day in most cases, little more than a coffee addiction. It is not uncommon for a person to lose all he has in a casino.

This is all fine if you're a social Darwinist, I suppose, but that doesn't address the fact that virtually all urban casino's are surrounded by pretty heavily blighted areas. Does anyone want that?

[HenryAlan]

The safest part of Detroit is it's casino. But kind of like Kennedy said since the rest of the city is basically 3rd world it's tough to gauge.

It seems to me that most cities with casinos (at least in the U.S.) are Detroit/St. Louis type cities. That is to say, severely distressed, desperately seeking a silver bullet. I don't much like the idea of Boston joining that crowd. That said, the idea of a glamorous, high end casino is nevertheless appealing.

[GW2500]

Instead of looking at Atlantic City look at Camden NJ, I'd say inarguably worse and no casino (to my knowledge). I think the real cause of urban blight is lack of good education, transportation, jobs, and safety. If those issues are addressed then I don't see how a casino, which will create a lot of jobs, will single-handedly cause blight.

edit: It's pretty obvious I'm pro casino, but that assumes we build a gem.

[BosDevelop]

There are many, many alcoholics who drink only beer. Not many gambling addicts only play the lottery. Or rather, if you want to call lottery players addicts, they are still only losing a few dollars a day in most cases, little more than a coffee addiction. It is not uncommon for a person to lose all he has in a casino.

Once again, I urge you to spend just 10-20 minutes in a convenient store that sells scratch tickets in a low income area (better yet, a keno parlor). You are kidding yourself if you think those vices are not just as, if not more, detrimental than 2 casinos located in this state. Think about how easy it is to walk into a store on every corner in every town and drop a bunch of cash on what has now become scratch tickets as much as $10 a pop. Even downtown I see people who cannot afford these things throw down $50-$60 at a time. Are these same people really going to get in their car and drive to a casino every single time they get the urge to gamble? Well, guess what they can do that now if they want. Twin River and it's slots are 45 min from Boston and far less from the south shore.

[KentXie]

Once again, I urge you to spend just 10-20 minutes in a convenient store that sells scratch tickets in a low income area (better yet, a keno parlor). You are kidding yourself if you think those vices are not just as, if not more, detrimental than 2 casinos located in this state. Think about how easy it is to walk into a store on every corner in every town and drop a bunch of cash on what has now become scratch tickets as much as $10 a pop. Even downtown I see people who cannot afford these things throw down $50-$60 at a time. Are these same people really going to get in their car and drive to a casino every single time they get the urge to gamble? Well, guess what they can do that now if they want. Twin River and it's slots are 45 min from Boston and far less from the south shore.

HOWEVER, by building a casino, it adds onto the effect. If you say that scratch tickets are as detrimental as you say, adding 2 casinos will make it worse will it not?

[BosDevelop]

HOWEVER, by building a casino, it adds onto the effect. If you say that scratch tickets are as detrimental as you say, adding 2 casinos will make it worse will it not?

Not at all for the reasons I have already posted:

1) You can already hit a casino within 45 min of the Boston area for slot machines (Twin River)

2) You can already hit two mega casinos within 90 min of the Boston area for table games (Moheegan and Foxwoods)

3) You can already wager away your life savings without ever leaving your couch (internet gambling)

4) You can already gamble away your disposable income on virtually every street corner in the state (lotto, scratch tickets keno)

5) You can already wager all of your money on horses (Suffolk and other New England tracks)

My point is that folks who are addicted to gambling already have all of these options at their disposal. Adding two destination style casinos in two different locations in the state won't change the fact that Massachusetts gamblers have any number of ways to lose their money even from the comfort of their own home. I could appreciate the anti-casino argument a bit better if we didn't have all of the 5 options above for blowing your money. Are that many more people going to head to casinos because it's a 20-30 min drive as opposed to a drive that is 15-20 min longer? I don't see it. Gamblers will gamble no matter what the method or no matter the effort. Adding two casinos won't change that.

[kmp1284]

Not at all for the reasons I have already posted:

1) You can already hit a casino within 45 min of the Boston area for slot machines (Twin River)

2) You can already hit two mega casinos within 90 min of the Boston area for table games (Moheegan and Foxwoods)

3) You can already wager away your life savings without ever leaving your couch (internet gambling)

4) You can already gamble away your disposable income on virtually every street corner in the state (lotto, scratch tickets keno)

5) You can already wager all of your money on horses (Suffolk and other New England tracks)

And that's just the legal stuff. When you add in the bookies and underground card games, you can blow a week's pay within a five minute walk of any residence in Suffolk County.

[singbat]

Some of that money collected goes to pay for workers paychecks. It allows individuals make a living. With their paychecks they can pay rent, buy groceries, contribute to their local economy. That is not economic nothingness, it lets people support themselves, thats a good thing. And if anything I'd say it is more of rich giving there money away, not the poor.

GW2500 that doesn't work in the context of a policy debate.

The jobs created by a casino reflect the value the casino operation adds to its transactions. it takes what to run a table? Not much -- some amount of presentation skill and knowledge of the table. That doesn't support a lot of follow-on lower skill jobs. And it doesn't lead to better things for most of the folks on the table -- they aren't all going to run the floor and that's about as good as it gets even for the few.

By contrast look at another piece of policy in the news: the Cape Wind project. What does it take to design, manufacture, install and maintain the electric infrastructure and deep water installations required? It takes a lot -- and hugely more than running a table at the brightest, blingyest casino in the world, let alone a pale shadow of that in MA.

The jobs that are likely to be created by that regulatory investment are also vastly more variegated and therefore more likely to support a complex web of economic activity in support of the actual project itself -- meaning the Cape Wind work pulls through more high quality opportunity at a variety of levels of skill. And I think that's what you are looking for.

We need more policy that delivers high value jobs -- not just more jobs of whatever quality happens along. Casinos as a jobs program is a shortcut that actually weakens the economy rather than strengthens it. It's a sugar high, at best. At worst, it's coke.

[kennedy]

So how about we allow Cape Wind and the casinos?

[Shepard]

Casinos as a jobs program is a shortcut that actually weakens the economy rather than strengthens it. It's a sugar high, at best. At worst, it's coke.

This is true, but it shouldn't be about jobs.

Who goes to Foxwoods and Mohegan? Some gambling addicts, sure. Certainly some people are going who should have stopped pulling the lever years or decades ago. But there are many more of another type of person: the vacationer, the elderly looking to be entertained, the college-aged poker whiz, the bachelor party...

Casinos are a forum wherein people are entertained. Some are addicted, but many more are looking for a a bit of entertainment and see however many dollars of losses as the cost of that entertainment. Casinos have much more entertainment value than lottery tickets or scratch tickets, or keno or dog racing. Will it create great jobs? No. But will it add to the total entertainment mix present in this city in a positive way? Yes. And what's the result? Fewer hotel vacancies, busier restaurants, larger tourist crowds, less braindrain to more "exciting" places like New York.

[GW2500]

Yep, I'm with Kennedy, lets have both. And I don't understand how sustained employment is bad for economics. If thats the case, then every hotel (housekeeping) restuarant (most of its staff) and grocery store (again most of it's staff) have dead end jobs and are bad for the economy. It's not like the people who take these type of jobs would otherwise be taking high end jobs. No the reality of it is that there will allways be a poor side of town, and not everyone can get awsome jobs. We can't all go to school until we're 27 invest 400K in education and become rocket scientists and ceo's. This will get more people off unemployment and working. Can't see the bad in that.

I don't think that the jobs this will add will make Mass substaintially better, I just think it will help out a little bit. The main aspect I like about a couple of casinos is the entertainment it will bring.

[BosDevelop]

Will it create great jobs? No.

I think it really depends what you consider "great." There are millions of Americans that would consider a $40,000+ a year (and benefits) job in a casino a great job.

Don't forget we are also talking about a hotel component here. There will need to be management positions within the hotel of course as well as simpler jobs such as housekeeping. These are all jobs that are very important as not every single Massachusetts resident has a graduate degree and is expecting a six figure salary. There are many people that do consider jobs within the hospitality industry as "great" jobs. Hell, even ivy league colleges offer degrees in hotel management. I understand we aren't talking about thousands of high paid management positions with two casinos here but as I said, there needs to be a balance and not everyone is qualified for management positions. That is just the way things will always be.

[Shepard]

Just to clarify, I don't thumb my nose at those type of jobs and know plenty of people who would like one. What I probably should have said was that it won't by itself create the quality or the volume of jobs needed to improve our economy. But the rest of my comment was saying that, jobs factor aside, it could boost the economic landscape in other ways.

[JohnAKeith]

But, of course! This should surprise no one.

Two Indian tribes in Massachusetts are still pushing to get federal recognition so they can build their own. So, we'll have ANOTHER two casinos, possibly more.

DeLeo opening casino door to tribes
By Paul McMorrow, The Boston Globe
May 10, 2010

ROBERT DeLEO wants to bring legalized gambling to Massachusetts. He wants two casinos and slots at four racing tracks, and right now, it looks like he?s going to get his wish.

And, potentially, a lot more. In DeLeo?s rush to appease the building trades and carve out some action for the two racetracks in his district, the speaker of the House is setting the table for a gambling expansion in Massachusetts that has the potential to be far broader than anything he?s pitching. He?s opening the door to new gambling halls on Martha?s Vineyard and the Cape, in Middleborough and Fall River. It?s also something neither he, nor anyone else on Beacon Hill, can control.

Forget, for a second, all the reasons we know we should worry about legalized gambling ? its regressive nature, the way it cannibalizes money that would otherwise be spent at local businesses, the negligible benefits it offers strained government budgets, the staggering social and regulatory costs. None of that has swayed DeLeo, or anybody else on Beacon Hill whose opinion actually matters these days. Two years ago, the Legislature was debating whether to legalize casinos at all; now the body is just wondering how many to greenlight.

The Mashpee Wampanoag and the Aquinnah, the state?s two federally recognized Native American tribes, have each expressed serious interest in owning a gleaming gambling hall. They haven?t been able to follow through on those urges because, legally, they can?t.

The tribes are sovereign, but they?re only allowed to set up a gambling shop at the highest level of gaming that?s legal in their home state. Right now, they could peddle scratch tickets, or maybe hop into the high-stakes bingo game. There?s no serious money in either pursuit. That changes the moment the governor signs a casino bill into law this summer. Each will be freed to set up gaming operations on their tribal land, on the Cape and Martha?s Vineyard. And the state wouldn?t be able to touch a dime of whatever rolls in.

There is a bit of fine print to tackle first. A Supreme Court decision has stalled the Mashpee Wampanoag effort to take land into federal trust, establishing a sovereign homeland. Still, anyone who thinks Congress will not eventually override the decision is wholly unfamiliar with Congress and with money; money and Congress, though, are by no means strangers.

Clearly, state-backed gambling enterprises will get rolling before any potential tribal enterprises. These things have life cycles of years, not months, though. The Mashpee Wampanoag fought for decades for federal recognition. In that context, the difference between a groundbreaking in 2010 and 2015 isn?t necessarily a deal-breaker. And anyone who thinks the gaming interests that form partnerships with tribes are afraid of competition should take a drive up the California coast, where every exit seems to feature a gambling outpost.

The speaker, who has assumed a leadership role in pushing gambling in the Commonwealth, is fond of quoting figures. He says he knows how many jobs will materialize, and how much cash will flow to cities and towns. His guys have it all figured out. Except that they don?t. They have no idea how many gaming operations the state will eventually wind up hosting. These things can change quickly. And they?re completely beyond Beacon Hill?s reach. Until 2007, the Mashpee Wampanoag weren?t a federally recognized tribe; months later, they had financial backers, and were talking about gobbling up more than 500 acres in Middleborough.

The Legislature hasn?t appeared to be preoccupied with asking questions about the ramifications of votes it takes. DeLeo, in particular, has been steering the effort to broaden gambling?s reach and install 3,000 slot machines at the state?s four racetracks (only two of which still feature actual racing, but let?s not nitpick).

Two of those four ? Suffolk Downs and Wonderland ? lie in the speaker?s district. Suffolk essentially controls Wonderland, a greyhound track rotten with debt; DeLeo?s version of the gambling legislation would hand Suffolk?s politically wired ownership half of the state?s slots market, giving it a virtual lock on one of the two full casino licenses the state will be selling off. That?s the point, really.

DeLeo rose to his post at Sal DiMasi?s right hand. DeLeo was responsible for divvying up the state budget?s spoils ? a process that has long rewarded leadership?s allies, and delivered punishing blows to political enemies. His path into DiMasi?s old office was cleared with budgetary earmarks.

The casino debate shows DeLeo still playing the part of the two-bit committee chairman. DeLeo has yet to fully grasp that the speaker?s office is a statewide position. Here he is, about to dramatically reshape the state?s economic landscape, and he?s obsessing over his district, his neighborhood guys, the tracks he grew up visiting. From the beginning, he has been out to get a piece of the action for his two tracks. And now he?s on the cusp. Once he opens that door, though, he should watch out ? that?s when things get interesting.

Paul McMorrow is a staff writer for Banker & Tradesman.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/05/10/deleo_opening_casino_door_to_tribes/?page=full

[palindrome]

oh dear...

I don't like the sound of this.

[Beton Brut]

Casino Forum tomorrow night (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?t=3438) at the Don Orione Hall in Orient Heights (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=42.389996,-71.005583&spn=0.001046,0.002411&t=h&z=19).

[singbat]

I'm heading up to Rockport this weekend. I suspect the small business owners up there who are going to lose business to casinos are not happy about the idea.

Moreover, the money that goes into a casino rather than into Gloucester's Festa or Rockport's 4th is going into one place. If that money went to the small business owners with their diseconomies of scale it would filter out into the economy much better -- thereby driving more of the non-rocket scientist jobs that we need to compliment the gee-wiz economy between Cambridge, Burlington and Waltham.

Damn shame!


there are many more of another type of person: the vacationer, the elderly looking to be entertained, the college-aged poker whiz, the bachelor party...

Casinos are a forum wherein people are entertained. Some are addicted, but many more are looking for a a bit of entertainment and see however many dollars of losses as the cost of that entertainment. Casinos have much more entertainment value than lottery tickets or scratch tickets, or keno or dog racing. Will it create great jobs? No. But will it add to the total entertainment mix present in this city in a positive way? Yes. And what's the result? Fewer hotel vacancies, busier restaurants, larger tourist crowds, less braindrain to more "exciting" places like New York.

[tobyjug]

So how about we allow Cape Wind and the casinos?

In one spot? "Blow your money."

[TheRifleman]

Mayor backs casino team including Filene?s block developer
Running with the enemy
By Thomas Grillo
Wednesday, July 7, 2010 - Updated 7h ago
+ Recent Articles


E-mail Print (0) Comments Text size Share Buzz up!Despite publicly flogging a New York real estate company for failing to redevelop the former Filene?s site in Downtown Crossing, Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino is backing its bid to build a casino at Suffolk Downs.

Menino?s Public Enemy No. 1 - Vornado Realty Trust - is a 20 percent owner of the East Boston racetrack that yesterday unveiled plans for a $600 million resort casino.

Six miles away, Vornado has left a blighted hole in Downtown Crossing where plans stalled for a $650 million project that would include a 39-story tower and rehab of the original Filene?s Basement store.

Dorothy Joyce, Menino?s spokeswoman, said the two projects are completely different: One is a fully operational gambling facility, while the other could not secure a tenant for the planned office space.

?Every project is different and (the mayor?s) not too concerned about the casino deal,? she said.

Menino has supported the Suffolk Downs venture, saying it?s the right place for a casino. Asked why he?s supporting a development that would benefit Vornado, Menino hedged.

?I support the concept of casinos and bringing new revenues to the city,? Menino said. ?Those issues will be dealt with as we move forward.?

John Ribeiro, founder of Neighbors of Suffolk Downs, a coalition of groups opposed to a casino, said it?s ironic that the mayor is supporting Vornado in East Boston, but criticizing the company about Downtown Crossing.

?The whole thing is contradictory,? he said. ?On the one hand, we tell downtown businesses to operate one way, but if they bring a casino they can operate any way they want.?

In March, Menino threatened to use eminent domain powers to seize the gutted former Filene?s site in Downtown Crossing after Vornado?s billionaire chairman, Steven Roth, bragged to a Columbia University audience about using a deliberate blight strategy to extract government concessions on a similar project in Manhattan.

Calls to Vornado were not returned yesterday.

Richard Fields, chairman of Coastal Development LLC, is the largest shareholder of Suffolk Downs, owning 47 percent of the track, while Boston concessionaire Joseph O?Donnell owns a 33 percent chunk.

In a statement, William Mulrow, chairman of the board of Suffolk Downs, said ?Vornado is a minority investor in Suffolk Downs with no active role in the operation or management of the thoroughbred track.?

Panel?s ?racino? backers may have upper hand:


http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1266218

[gooseberry]

http://www.boston.com/business/ticker/2010/07/suffolk_downs_r.html
http://www.boston.com/business/ticker/2010/07/06/casinofrontgif.gif
http://www.boston.com/business/ticker/2010/07/06/casinohotelgif.gif

[TheRifleman]

^^^

Truly a beautiful development for an area packed full of the biggest degenerates on the planet.

I am actually conflicted about the casino development in this area. I think this area sucks so I'm curious if the Casino actually makes sense.

On the other hand Casino's IMHO are a bad foundation for economic growth and they are also known for depressing the areas around them. I would have left the casinos in CT. Foxwoods and Mohegan know that if Mass builds the casino's they will lose around 30% of revenue generated from Massachusett's finest.


On the Menino front this guy is the biggest hypocrite on the planet. He could careless about the city of Boston he is now in politics to make as much money as possible.

I'm tired of the excuses Dorothy Joyce continues to make up for the Menino Administration. Please Dorothy have some integrity when you speak not all the American citizens are clueless sheep.

?Every project is different and (the mayor?s) not too concerned about the casino deal,? she said.

So defined basically means-- that whatever project works for us and our friends we really don?t care what you think.

I can?t believe we sit around and listen to these assholes.

[kennedy]

I wonder if they would build it on the side of the track near the marsh, so that it would have easy access to the T? That could be one highlight, considering the Suffolk Downs stop hardly gets any traffic.

They are beautiful renders, you can't deny that. Maybe they look like they belong somewhere in Virginia, but regardless - they're pretty. And that will certainly help sell the project to the public.

I'm leaning pro-casino. Sure, there are a multitude of degenerate effects caused by gambling, but I feel that the economic benefit might outweigh the casino. Ever since reading Seabiscuit, I've hoped that Suffolk Downs might become a premier horse track again someday. And finally, I wouldn't mind being able to hop on the T and play a few card games some night.

[bostonbred]

This place lookin like CASINOATS

Old uncle LIKING suflock DOwnes place AND owning SHARE of this HORSE!!!. i hope NOT the NOUGHTY PARTs!!!

BUT. wHY nOt puting caSINO at FLIINES place?

[Beton Brut]

Truly a beautiful development for an area packed full of the biggest degenerates on the planet.

I suppose I've been called worse.

[atlantaden]

LOL, I was wondering what your reply was gonna be!

[AmericanFolkLegend]

The renderings look like knockoffs of the Jones Beach Bathhouses. I would prefer something that's a little more resort/destination/upscale looking. Maybe it's the lack of hotel towers . . .

[TheRifleman]

I suppose I've been called worse.

Are you for or against these projects? Their are major players involved with this development and unless you have 150 Ned Flahtery's protesting, I personally believe that this casino's will be built.


I was at Revere Beach the other night the cops are very strict in that area and want everybody out on the right side of the beach out by 10 PM.

The area has cleaned up very nice. I'm not sure if adding a casino will be positive or negative for the area. What are your thoughts?

[statler]

^^ BB has made his position on this casino very clear (http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=99742&postcount=31).

[GW2500]

If it gets built I'll have some fun there, if it dosn't I'll live.

[TheRifleman]

^^ BB has made his position on this casino very clear (http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=99742&postcount=31).


The first claim against the Neighborhood activists is that the developers are going to claim that "gambling has been going on in this area for nearly 3 decades so what is the difference on betting on horses or betting on slots, or card games.

It's very sad to say but your fighting a losing battle here. The only fight is how much will the developers and investors give to the neighborhood if they give anything.

The real concern will be the TRAFFIC around the area.

[BostonUrbEx]

I wonder if they would build it on the side of the track near the marsh, so that it would have easy access to the T?

This is what I'm hoping for, too. Otherwise, I don't like it in this area too much. It's just not suitable, IMO.

[GW2500]

I'd be surprised if they can build in the marsh. I imagine it's wetlands that is protected by 5 different agencies.

[Beton Brut]

The wetlands are indeed a protected state reservation (http://www.mass.gov/dcr/parks/metroboston/belleisle.htm).

statler, thanks for reposting my thoughts on this complicated issue.

[TheRifleman]

The wetlands are indeed a protected state reservation (http://www.mass.gov/dcr/parks/metroboston/belleisle.htm).

statler, thanks for reposting my thoughts on this complicated issue.

Right away tell them your against this project.

Make your point on the wetlands and then ask beside Vegas (because that was a desert) can you name one area in this country where a casino actually improved it's surroundings? It actually sucks money out of the local economy. It will provide poverty in your surroundings.

(maybe they buy you out because your educated)

Never mind the amount of degenerates in that area. Your looking at Nuclear destruction to that area if the casino gets built. LOL.
It would be one hell of a people's watching spot.

[Lurker]

It would be one hell of a people's watching spot.

Would you stand in the middle of a river to watch piranhas?

[TheRifleman]

Would you stand in the middle of a river to watch piranhas?

Your thinking it might be that extreme over there. DAM, I thought I was insulting poor Benton.

[HenryAlan]

They are beautiful renders, you can't deny that. Maybe they look like they belong somewhere in Virginia, but regardless - they're pretty. And that will certainly help sell the project to the public.

It reminds me quite a bit of Disney's Saratoga Springs Resort:

http://www.hayneswhaley.com/project_images/Disney%27sSaratogaSprings.jpg

[Beton Brut]

I appreciate the advice, folks, but this isn't my first rodeo.

I grew up in the aftermath of the eminent domain annihilation of Wood Island Park and the Neptune Road neighborhood. I was bused away from a school I could see from my front porch. Since my teenage years, I've shouted myself hoarse at scores of community meetings sponsored by the MWRA, CA/T, Massport, the FAA, and the MBTA. I've grown up a cynic, with a healthy mistrust in my elected officials. I believe that we all die alone and afraid.

Last fall, I spent two year's take-home to renovate Chez Brut, so I don't plan on getting bought out by investors who couldn't find my street on a map. And I don't want a dime of mitigation money -- my silence and consent are not on sale to the highest bidder.

Last Wednesday night (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=104656#post104656), I listened to a bunch of pols talk about the casino bill as a "jobs bill." Of course there will be jobs if a casino is built at Suffolk Downs, or at Wonderland, or at any other site. But those jobs have a cost associated with them, and there's enough evidence out there that tells me that the cost will undermine the value that the State will receive in return. Further, I believe that the cost will be set against the quality of life in my community. Considering history, that is simply unacceptable.

At last week's meeting, I asked Chip Tuttle (Suffolk Downs COO) if he'd be happy if his daughter grew up to be a cocktail waitress. I think he felt my question was "combative" and walked away from me. The Mayor has grandkids -- maybe I should ask him?

[Shepard]

That rendering also made me think of Saratoga. It has the wow-factor of a Christmas Tree Shoppe.

Where's the neon?

It would be downright sinister if this were only marginally T accessible.

[Beton Brut]

It would be downright sinister if this were only marginally T accessible.

The high rollers aren't gonna show up on the Blue Line (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=orient+heights+east+boston&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Orient+Heights,+Boston,+Massachusetts&gl=us&ei=ruI0TMqXLYH_8Ab2lfjyAg&ved=0CBQQ8gEwAA&ll=42.390185,-70.996184&spn=0.01756,0.033088&t=h&z=15). That's for the folks who wanna take a chance with their unemployment check.

[czsz]

That rendering also made me think of Saratoga. It has the wow-factor of a Christmas Tree Shoppe.

Where's the neon?

It would be downright sinister if this were only marginally T accessible.

Basically what I was thinking. How about something swish, like the Casino de Montreal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino_de_Montr%C3%A9al)? They could do with the ideal of putting it far out on some island as well.

[tobyjug]

Casino de Montreal is nice. Swish? I don't know.

The Art Deco rendering shows a cleaned up version of what is there now. It isn't awful, contrary to what some might think. It is a bit like Fenway Park, pre-John Henry. In a remodel I guess I'd prefer an elaboration on the Deco theme rather than the Colonel's plantation.

The biggest current problem is that the purses are too low to attract top talent. If this becomes a casino I hope that there is some provision in the enabling law that requires a certain percentage of the revenue go to addressing that problem.

[singbat]

I'm leaning pro-casino. Sure, there are a multitude of degenerate effects caused by gambling, but I feel that the economic benefit might outweigh the casino.

Do you have an economics degree? just asking...

[belmont square]

It would be downright sinister if this were only marginally T accessible.

At worst it will be as accessible to the subway as Fenway Park. The walk to the track's front door from the T is currently about as far as Fenway from Kenmore station.

[kennedy]

Do you have an economics degree? just asking...

No. Do you?

My use of words such as "leaning," "feel," and "might" were meant to dispel any notion that I was declaring my opinion as the truth. Apparently that didn't work.

[Pierce]

The high rollers aren't gonna show up on the Blue Line (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=orient+heights+east+boston&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Orient+Heights,+Boston,+Massachusetts&gl=us&ei=ruI0TMqXLYH_8Ab2lfjyAg&ved=0CBQQ8gEwAA&ll=42.390185,-70.996184&spn=0.01756,0.033088&t=h&z=15). That's for the folks who wanna take a chance with their unemployment check.

I imagine casinos bank much more on middle-income bourgeousie splashouts than high rollers, and also don't forget all the low-paid employees need to get to the place too

[Beton Brut]

You're right Pierce. Do you think that the majority of those groups will arrive by private automobile, motorcoach, or via the T.

[blade_bltz]

Holy cow, I didn't realize how dense the T service is up there (from Orient Heights to Beachmont). This should be a brand new full-service neighborhood.

Yes, I know, pipe dream. But talk about lost TOD opportunities.

[Beton Brut]

^^ The crux of my "best & highest use" argument.

But a confluence of circumstance, inept public policy, political corruption, and a turn in population demographics (brought about by the undermining of quality of life caused by first three points) has relegated East Boston and its satellite communities to the status of New England's Litterbox.

[AC]

At worst it will be as accessible to the subway as Fenway Park. The walk to the track's front door from the T is currently about as far as Fenway from Kenmore station.
They already run shuttle busses to and from the T stop.

[statler]

^^ The crux of my "best & highest use" argument.

But a confluence of circumstance, inept public policy, political corruption, and a turn in population demographics (brought about by the undermining of quality of life caused by first three points) has relegated East Boston and its satellite communities to the status of New England's Litterbox.

Wouldn't the fact that giant-ass airplanes are constantly flying over at low altitudes also contribute to some of that?

Or would that fall under "circumstance"?

[Beton Brut]

D.) All of the above

[Ron Newman]

They already run shuttle busses to and from the T stop.

Why? It's a pretty short walk and you don't even have to cross any streets.

[Pierce]

You're right Pierce. Do you think that the majority of those groups will arrive by private automobile, motorcoach, or via the T.

Point taken, but maximized public transit connection will only help this project. They will still be competing with Connecticut for the car/luxobus crowd, but could monopolize the demographic of households with no car, or less than one car per driver, or people who want to drink and gamble and not pay for a hotel or a long cabride.

To your question, in terms of the employees: given the vast amount of service jobs in a casino and the economic landscape of the north/east Boston area (not to mention the tolls associated with returning from Suffolk Downs to "mainland Boston" by car) I would think the casino would have a markedly high rate of employees who rely on the T.

[Beton Brut]

I wonder what Moshe Safdie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Bay_Sands) has to say about all of this.

[kennedy]

Woah, no idea that was a Moshe Safdie design! I saw a special on that on the show Build it Bigger on the Science Channel. Not exactly the most inspired architecture, but certainly a feat of engineering.