Hey, there! Log in / Register
Menino could seek delay in Suffolk Downs vote
By adamg on Sun, 10/20/2013 - 10:51am
WBUR reports the mayor might look at trying to delay the vote if Suffolk Downs doesn't have a managing company now that Caesars is out.
A no vote on Nov. 5 would kill the casino proposal, which also needs the approval of the state gaming commission.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Aren't ballots already printed?
and in the case of absentee ballots, already mailed out? The election is 16 days away.
Delay it
How can a vote be legitimate if they don't even know what they are voting for?
"Legitimate"?
We were ready to have the vote without the background info on who holds Vornado's blind trust and that was felt legitimate, what's the difference?
In truth the whole process has been one murky cluster-fuck. The Commission and the City have not followed the procedures by the letter of the law and it obviously plays out like variances at the BRA -- on the Mayor's good side, you get what you want; on the bad side, for some reason you can't get through the red tape. We should have the vote on the date planned because that's when they set it. If the proponent wants to pull out they should have to go all the way back to the start with the process. Doesn't seem fair to the other applicants. Not that I think Wynn should pass the sniff test either.
Good Point
Due to the Vornado thing the vote should have never been scheduled in the first place. If they can't find investors without shady background then they shouldn't have a casino. Should Wynn fail the background check that should also disqualify that casino site permanently. There is no need to rush to select a site.
Weighing in:
I'm admittedly not a Boston resident, but I'd vote NO on this question on November 5th, because I strongly oppose having any casinos here in the Bay State.
I mean...seriously..We need casinos like we need extra holes in our heads! Casinos, imho, are no way to create jobs, imho. They are a way, however, to bring more prostitution, crime, drugs, gamblling and other vices here into the Bay State and perhaps turn Boston into another Mohegan Sun or an Atlantic City, which we sure don't need.
I agree, we never needed a
I agree, we never needed a casino when we had a republican governor.
Bring on someone that knows how to manage the business and bring in high tech jobs.
Vote out anyone who voted for the new software tax, even if they realized too late it was the wrong thing to do.
Yes, because we all know
how fiscally responsible Republicans are....ask Ted Cruz.
Compared to whom?
Our Democratic comrades who want to tax and spend us into oblivion? Cruz is no saint after the stunts he pulled in the latest fiasco-but the other side of the aisle needs to have their credit cards cut up.
Massachusetts is being sold a
Massachusetts is being sold a load of goods on these casinos. Who is going to go there? New York State also has a ballot proposal this year to allow 7 casino licenses to be built across the state. It seems like all these states are cutting the casino pie into smaller and smaller slices, and the only ones who will win are the developers.
Its the erosion of society ,
Its the erosion of society , it started when the stores started opening on Sundays ,and the Mass Lottery with its Keno and scratch tickets on every corner , just throw the loser tickets on the ground . Just try to find a nice bake shop these days, with bread and pastries. Sheesh !
Well, I don't know about that
Well, I don't know about that. What I do know is that all these communities are being told that they will rake in millions and bazillions of dollars in tax revenue, when those estimates are based on the (false) idea that there will be no other casinos in the area. There are only so many people who want to gamble, and every new casino that is built will split that money into smaller and smaller chunks. Besides, everyone will head to whichever casino is the newest, the biggest, the brightest, and the shiniest, leaving the older casinos in the dust.
In addition...
The people who will go to the casinos are often the same people that play the lottery - especially the money making slot machines. They only have so much money in their pockets to gamble with so if they play the slots - that's probably less they play in the lottery. While we may get some mitigation money from the Casino, some/a lot of that could be offset with reduced state aid. Of course, most people don't think of this or don't know how the system works so they think it's all extra money. For Eastie which is getting earmarked dollars - probably a good thing. For the rest of the city - who will still have to pay for a lot of this AND see decreased revenue from the state - not so good. One more reason this should be a citywide vote.
Erosion of Society--
Ordinarily I'd say that the cheapening of society is more like it, but I think that the erosion of our society and culture and their cheapening actually go hand in hand together; they're both happening at once.
I don't think that stores starting to open on Sundays has had anything to do with the erosion and cheapening of our society, especially since, even before the Blue Laws were repealed here in the Bay State (which I'm glad they were!), stores in most other states were allowed to stay open on Sundays.
The fact that anybody could even consider having casinos here in the Boston area to supposedly create jobs, etc., however, does indicate how far our society and culture have fallen, and it's not good, at all.
What legal authority
There is no provision anywhere in the Expanded Gaming Act or interpreting regulations which allows the applicant or the city to reschedule the vote on a whim. The Commission purposely designed this process so that it was up to the applicant to call the election (presumably when it felt that everything was in place and ready to go forward) and the fact that Suffolk Downs chose to build its application on quicksand really is not our problem. Even if the Secretary of State were to come back with some reasonable excuse to delay the vote, there is absolutely no realistic chance that a new partner could renegotiate the parts of the mitigation agreement previously applicable to Caesars, earn the trust of the neighborhood, and call an election before the licensing deadline of December 31. It's time for Suffolk Downs to fold 'em.