| Author |
 Topic  |
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
 Posted - 12/21/2012 : 12:32:53 PM
|
EVERETT, Mass. (AP) -- Las Vegas casino developer Steve Wynn has taken another step in his latest bid to bring a resort casino to Massachusetts.
The Boston Globe reports that Wynn has signed an option on 35 acres of land along the Mystic River in Everett. He visited the site, formerly home to a chemical plant, and met with city officials last month.
Wynn dropped an earlier proposal to develop a casino in Foxborough after opposition from residents and town officials.
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has set a Jan. 15 deadline for potential casino developers to submit a preliminary application along with a $400,000 application fee.
If Wynn moves ahead with the Everett plan, he'll likely compete with Suffolk Downs in East Boston for the single resort casino license in eastern Massachusetts.
You must be logged in to see this link.
|
|
|
Jane
Senior Member
102 Posts |
Posted - 12/31/2012 : 06:15:53 AM
|
| I wonder what Wynn this of all this coruption with Smith, Smith was in favor of the casino. wonder if he will get the hall away from Everett in the coming year. |
 |
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2013 : 1:55:38 PM
|
Everett casino idea draws a laugh from Menino
By Andy Metzger, State House News Service
BOSTON, JAN. 8, 2013…..A vocal backer of a proposed Suffolk Downs casino, Boston Mayor Tom Menino cast some shade on a competing casino proposal, for a site in Everett, and intimated he might have a say in how the Everett proposal moves forward.
“The interesting part of it is I own part of the Everett piece,” Menino said referring to a chunk of Boston that extends across the Mystic River, bordering Everett. Menino followed that remark with a sarcastic laugh, saying, “Heh heh. Ha ha ha ha ha. Hahaah.
“And you know something? And to get into the piece, you have to go through my property. Aha. They never spoke to me,” Menino said. Asked about the Everett casino, Menino said, “Nobody’s ever talked to me about it. I only read the newspaper accounts. I haven’t met anybody who has represented the other folks, from Everett.”
After pro-casino candidates were roundly defeated in local Foxborough elections, casino magnate Steve Wynn dropped his plans for a casino tie-in with Gillette Stadium, and then resurfaced recently with plans to build a casino on a former Monsanto Chemical Company site on Chemical Lane, across the river from Somerville and Charlestown.
“Wynn Resorts has signed to an option for land in Everett to build a unique, luxury resort,” Wynn spokesman Michael Weaver told the News Service in a statement. “The company has no plans for development in Boston. We have had positive and constructive communication with Everett Mayor DeMaria and look forward to working with the Everett community.”
DeMaria did not respond to a request for comment. The process is still in its early stages in Everett. According to Boston assessor’s department records, a roughly 46,000 square foot commercial lot along Chemical Lane falls within Boston’s boundaries, along with other land along the banks of the Mystic.
Menino, meanwhile, has put his considerable political capital behind a proposal for Caesars Entertainment to develop a casino on the aging Suffolk Downs horse track, which straddles the border of East Boston and Revere.
Menino commented on the Everett proposal at his temporary Parkman House residence following a press conference about plans for Converse Inc. to relocate its headquarters to lease office space on a redeveloped Boston wharf.
Menino’s remarks were the second public criticism neighboring mayors have cast on Wynn’s Everett proposal. Somerville Mayor Joe Curtatone has been outspoken in his opposition to any casino, and said he would fight to prevent a casino in Everett.
“We’re opposed. I’ve been opposed and my community’s been vehemently opposed to a casino whether it’s in our borders or a hundred yards away,” Curtatone told the News Service. Curtatone noted that it is a “highly congested area” and said, “We will do anything and everything to protect the quality of life in our community.”
The Somerville mayor has an equally negative view of a proposal for Suffolk Downs.
“My beliefs about casinos are what they are no matter where they are,” Curtatone said. “That’s been my position always.”
Under the 2011 gaming law, Massachusetts was divided into three regions, each of which could have one resort-style casino. Suffolk Downs and the Monsanto site are both in the same region. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s deadline for the application fee and first phase of submissions is Tuesday, Jan. 15. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2013 : 2:11:06 PM
|
Menino: Everett Casino Traffic Would Go Through Charlestown
The mayor said Tuesday that the developer of a Boston-area casino project had not yet approached the city with a proposal.
Mayor Thomas Menino said though he believes a casino project in Everett would impact Boston greatly, the developer behind that proposal has yet to seek input from city officials.
Following a press conference on his 2013-14 state legislative session goals, Menino was asked about Wynn LLC’s recent application to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission to construct a resort-casino along the Mystic River in Everett and whether he thought the project would affect city traffic.
“You’d have to go through Charlestown, over the city’s property. That’s the gateway into the Everett site,” Menino said. “I’ve talked to several folks in development who’ve said to me that Boston leads into the site.”
The mayor also had concerns about how a nearby casino would tax the city’s infrastructure.
“Who’s paying for that? I’ve never heard anybody talk about the infrastructure, the roadways around the proposed Everett site,” he said.
Menino was also asked whether a second developer, Neil Bluhm of Mass Gaming and Entertainment, had presented his proposal to develop a casino in the Boston area.
The mayor’s response: “No.”
Tuesday was the deadline for developers to submit applications with the Massachusetts Gaming Commission for the first application phase. The process was set up following passage of the state’s expanded gaming law in 2011, which allows for casinos to be opened in the commonwealth.
As of early Tuesday, seven companies had submitted Phase 1 applications, and the $400,000 application fee, according to a news release posted on the Gaming Commission website.
“MGM, Penn National, Hard Rock and Mohegan Sun have indicated interest in competing in Western Massachusetts (Region B) for one of the state’s three resort-casino licenses,” the release stated. “Plainridge Racecourse, located in Plainville, Massachusetts, has indicated interest in competing for the state’s single slots-parlor license. Wynn, LLC has cited interest in pursuing a resort-casino license in Everett, MA (Region A).”
In addition, the operators of Suffolk Downs, partnering with Caesar’s Entertainment, have proposed a $1 billion resort-casino to be located at the site of the Suffolk Downs racetrack in East Boston, the Boston Globe reported. Only one license is available in the Greater Boston area.
Wynn LLC Founder and CEO Steve Wynn is reportedly eying a 37-acre property in Everett—which formerly housed the Monsanto Chemical Co. plant—for his new casino, according to an article on Boston.com. Wynn’s past projects include the Bellagio, The Mirage and Treasure Island in Las Vegas.
The Everett project includes development of a resort hotel with between 300 and 500 rooms, the Globe reported.
And as the Boston Business Journal reported on Tuesday, Bluhm’s Mass Gaming and Entertainment has also submitted an application for the Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s Phase 1 review. The company is reportedly evaluating several sites in the Boston area
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
|
|
kittycat
Member
66 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2013 : 5:06:08 PM
|
| Casino Vote Set for Saturday June 22nd. it could change again |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2013 : 11:09:21 PM
|
If that's the date (and I have no reason not to believe it), I guess that means that the host agreement would have to be available some time tomorrow in some fashion since a minimum review period of 60 days is required before holding the election.
A Saturday election in early summer? An interesting choice... |
|
|
|
imbroglio
Member
47 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2013 : 6:21:46 PM
|
The strategy is to have a referendum with a low turnout. That way they can just get the insiders to the polls and rig the result. The issue should be placed on the November municipal ballot. At least it would result in a more accurate assessment of the views of the community. They are just trying to rush this through under the radar.
I encourage everybody to acquaint themselves with the Saint Consulting Group of Nashville, TN and its CEO P. Michael Saint. It would give you a great deal of insight about what is going on. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2013 : 11:25:19 PM
|
Pretty shady that a "grassroots" organization doesn't need any money but can afford full page color ads in the local newspapers, a slick website and a billboard on lower Broadway, etc. It's not all that hard to put 2 and 2 together.
Transparency? I guess it just depends on how you define the word. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2013 : 12:06:50 PM
|
Milford Town Meeting takes a pass on casino vote
By Ellen Ishkanian, Globe Correspondent
Milford Town Meeting voters declined to take a vote on a nonbinding citizens petition to express opposition to the siting of a casino on 200 acres of land along Interstate 495.
By a better than two to one margin, Town Meeting members opted Monday to wait for more information before taking a vote on whether to go on record opposing the plans by Foxwoods to build a $1 billion resort casino planned for the land along the town’s border with Hopkinton.
The nonbinding citizens petition sponsored by Precinct 1 Town Meeting Member Richard A. Morrison would have been the first indication which way the town is going on the casino issue.
Those opposed to the casino had wanted this to be a message to the Board of Selectmen that the town is opposed, no matter what Foxwoods representatives may be able to provide in financial incentives.
“I’ve heard enough.” Morrison said. “I don’t think we should lose our values to someone who promises to pave our streets with gold.”
But Precinct 4 Town Meeting Member Brad Mattscheck (cq) said the issue is polarizing, and should go before the entire town for a vote when both sides have had a chance to present their case.
“Right now we only have really only heard from one side,” he said, indicating that the organized opposition to the casino has managed to get its side heard.
“A vote against this referendum would have been seen as being in favor of the casino, when that may not be the case at all,” Mattscheck said. He said he is personally opposed to siting a casino in Milford, but wants to hear more details of the plan before making a final decision.
“It would have been an exercise in futility to vote now,” he said.
In an email statement to the Globe following the vote, Scott Butera, president and chief executive officer of Foxwoods, which runs a casino in Connecticut, said the decision “will allow Milford residents to make an informed choice in accordance with the timeline set up the the Massachusetts Gaming Commission,” which is expected to make its decision on granting three casino licenses in the state early next year.
“We are currently engaged in extensive study of all factors involved in bringing a resort casino to Milford in preparation for a referendum later this year,” he wrote.
He added that he welcomes feedback from town residents so “we may proceed collaboratively, build trust and offer a resort that reflects the unique character of the community.”
Selectman Brian W. Murray said before Town Meeting that the nonbinding vote, if it were taken, wouldn’t affect his decision, saying a meeting with Foxwoods representative scheduled soon should provide more details.
“At that time we should get a better sense of how much progress has been made and whether all our questions and concerns can get answered within the tight timeframe,” he said.
The Milford proposal is competing for the sole Greater Boston license with Suffolk Downs, which is proposing an East Boston casino with partner Caesars Entertainment; and Wynn Resorts, which is planning a hotel casino on the Mystic River waterfront in Everett. Before a license is issued, local elected officials must enter into a host agreement with the casino and then voters must pass a referendum on the proposal in a general election.
Ellen Ishkanian can be reached at eishkanian@gmail.com. |
|
|
|
cozulady
Senior Member
165 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2013 : 1:40:37 PM
|
Below is the text copied from the "Medford Patch" about the meeting held on Monday 7/8 in Medford regarding the impact of a casino in Everett on their city. The picture of Carlo looks like a child pouting. Here's the link if you want to see the entire page: You must be logged in to see this link.
Medford City Officials, Residents Raise Concerns with Everett Casino Proposal
At times, Monday’s meeting got contentious.
Medford city officials and residents raised concerns Monday with representatives from Wynn Resorts about the developer’s $1.2 billion casino proposal on the Mystic River in neighboring Everett.
Medford Mayor Michael McGlynn, who opposes the project, said traffic, especially on Route 16, and environmental impacts are his main concerns, while City Councillor Richard Caraviello brought up the economic impacts, possibly negative, the casino could have on Medford restaurants and businesses.
The two sides met at the Hyatt Place in Medford Monday morning. In addition to city officials, including many department heads, and the group from Wynn, Everett Mayor Carlo DeMaria Jr. and a handful of residents were also in attendance.
A few nearby Medford residents also mentioned the impacts on traffic, and on property values.
After Wynn’s general counsel, Kim Sinatra, gave an overview of the project at the old Monsanto chemical plant, at times, the meeting got contentious, especially between Medford city councillors and DeMaria.
“You’re getting a financial reward, we’re getting nothing,” City Councillor Robert Penta told Everett’s mayor.
“You’ve been getting financial reward for the last 50 years,” DeMaria replied. “We haven’t had a crane in the city of Everett.”
DeMaria brought up Medford’s Station Landing on a few occasions, noting that Everett had no say in that neighboring development.
“I was happy to see Station Landing developed,” he said, “but Everett didn’t have a say in what happened in Medford – we never have.”
After one Station-Landing reference, McGlynn said, “That’s over now.”
DeMaria is a strong supporter of the casino project for his city, and last month, Everett voters overwhelmingly backed the project, 86.5 to 13.5 percent, allowing it to move forward.
The casino proposal is one of three being considered by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission in the eastern part of the state – East Boston and Milford being the other two. A decision is expected in the first half of 2014.
DeMaria was confident the Everett proposal would move forward.
“I’m not a betting man anymore,” he said, “but I’m going to bet the application is going to go forward.”
DeMaria praised Wynn’s leader, Steve Wynn. He also focused on the positives, such as the infrastructure improvements, and downplayed concerns, such as traffic.
“It’s not a ballgame where 30,000 people are coming out at one time,” he said. “I’ve never sat in traffic going to Foxwoods.”
Sinatra said casinos have shown to help nearby restaurants and businesses by bringing people to the area and providing jobs.
The meeting was also the beginning of the mitigation process. Even though McGlynn is opposed to the project, if it moves forward, he wants a say.
DeMaria said he considers Medford a “surrounding community,” or a community that is impacted by the project, therefore, allowing it to go through mitigation under the state statue.
McGlynn said he believes Medford will be a “surrounding community.”
“I would be shocked if we weren’t,” he said. “ … There is no way to get north or west without going through Medford.”
The mayor’s office is collecting residents’ concerns about the project through two email addresses, casinocomments@medford.org or casinoconcerns@medford.org. The mayor is in charge of mitigation, according to the state statute.
City Councillor Michael Marks said he thought the meeting should have been better advertised so more residents would have known about it. Marks, who lives near Wellington Circle, also disagreed with DeMaria’s take that the casino being a “destination” would be a positive.
“I didn’t buy [my house] to live five minutes from a resort destination,” he said.
“I know this will be a win, win for the City of Everett,” Marks added. “I don’t think it’ll be a win, win for the City of Medford.”
The City Council has made three resolutions against the casino.
“I was a little disappointed to hear some of the stuff you guys said,” DeMaria told Penta.
“You can be disappointed all you want,” Penta replied. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2013 : 3:05:42 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by cozulady
Below is the text copied from the "Medford Patch" about the meeting held on Monday 7/8 in Medford regarding the impact of a casino in Everett on their city. The picture of Carlo looks like a child pouting. Here's the link if you want to see the entire page: You must be logged in to see this link.
Medford City Officials, Residents Raise Concerns with Everett Casino Proposal
At times, Monday’s meeting got contentious.
Medford city officials and residents raised concerns Monday with representatives from Wynn Resorts about the developer’s $1.2 billion casino proposal on the Mystic River in neighboring Everett.
Medford Mayor Michael McGlynn, who opposes the project, said traffic, especially on Route 16, and environmental impacts are his main concerns, while City Councillor Richard Caraviello brought up the economic impacts, possibly negative, the casino could have on Medford restaurants and businesses.
The two sides met at the Hyatt Place in Medford Monday morning. In addition to city officials, including many department heads, and the group from Wynn, Everett Mayor Carlo DeMaria Jr. and a handful of residents were also in attendance.
A few nearby Medford residents also mentioned the impacts on traffic, and on property values.
After Wynn’s general counsel, Kim Sinatra, gave an overview of the project at the old Monsanto chemical plant, at times, the meeting got contentious, especially between Medford city councillors and DeMaria.
“You’re getting a financial reward, we’re getting nothing,” City Councillor Robert Penta told Everett’s mayor.
“You’ve been getting financial reward for the last 50 years,” DeMaria replied. “We haven’t had a crane in the city of Everett.”
DeMaria brought up Medford’s Station Landing on a few occasions, noting that Everett had no say in that neighboring development.
“I was happy to see Station Landing developed,” he said, “but Everett didn’t have a say in what happened in Medford – we never have.”
After one Station-Landing reference, McGlynn said, “That’s over now.”
DeMaria is a strong supporter of the casino project for his city, and last month, Everett voters overwhelmingly backed the project, 86.5 to 13.5 percent, allowing it to move forward.
The casino proposal is one of three being considered by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission in the eastern part of the state – East Boston and Milford being the other two. A decision is expected in the first half of 2014.
DeMaria was confident the Everett proposal would move forward.
“I’m not a betting man anymore,” he said, “but I’m going to bet the application is going to go forward.”
DeMaria praised Wynn’s leader, Steve Wynn. He also focused on the positives, such as the infrastructure improvements, and downplayed concerns, such as traffic.
“It’s not a ballgame where 30,000 people are coming out at one time,” he said. “I’ve never sat in traffic going to Foxwoods.”
Sinatra said casinos have shown to help nearby restaurants and businesses by bringing people to the area and providing jobs.
The meeting was also the beginning of the mitigation process. Even though McGlynn is opposed to the project, if it moves forward, he wants a say.
DeMaria said he considers Medford a “surrounding community,” or a community that is impacted by the project, therefore, allowing it to go through mitigation under the state statue.
McGlynn said he believes Medford will be a “surrounding community.”
“I would be shocked if we weren’t,” he said. “ … There is no way to get north or west without going through Medford.”
The mayor’s office is collecting residents’ concerns about the project through two email addresses, casinocomments@medford.org or casinoconcerns@medford.org. The mayor is in charge of mitigation, according to the state statute.
City Councillor Michael Marks said he thought the meeting should have been better advertised so more residents would have known about it. Marks, who lives near Wellington Circle, also disagreed with DeMaria’s take that the casino being a “destination” would be a positive.
“I didn’t buy [my house] to live five minutes from a resort destination,” he said.
“I know this will be a win, win for the City of Everett,” Marks added. “I don’t think it’ll be a win, win for the City of Medford.”
The City Council has made three resolutions against the casino.
“I was a little disappointed to hear some of the stuff you guys said,” DeMaria told Penta.
“You can be disappointed all you want,” Penta replied.
That picture was priceless! He's like a baby in terrible twos when he doesn't get his way. What did he expect! I have to agree on one thing though....the fact Medford has been getting financial rewards and Everett hasn't seen a crane.
Makes me wonder what the reaction would be if the proposed casino would move to Medford. Would 6000 Everett residents (including the mayor) still support it then or speak out in opposition. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2013 : 2:16:59 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tails
[quote
That picture was priceless! He's like a baby in terrible twos when he doesn't get his way. What did he expect! I have to agree on one thing though....the fact Medford has been getting financial rewards and Everett hasn't seen a crane.
Makes me wonder what the reaction would be if the proposed casino would move to Medford. Would 6000 Everett residents (including the mayor) still support it then or speak out in opposition.
Maybe we should be asking why Everett hasn't seen a crane while Medford has? And would the citizens of Medford speak out in opposition if it was going to be located in their city?
As a supporter of the casino, I would continue to support it if it went to Medford. There will still be jobs available & employees need to live & eat somewhere. With luck, a few may come to our city to do those things........... |
|
|
|
socks
Member
39 Posts |
Posted - 07/12/2013 : 07:40:41 AM
|
| What bothers me most about the casino is the cleanup of the Monsanto land. How can anyone believe that "cleaning up" the area should not be a major concern? When the meetings were held here in Everett, I never heard anything about the risks to Everett and surrounding areas about the impact of disturbing the land and the water at the site. I realize that not all people think like I do, however, I believe that a cancer study should be a top priority of the administration. What good is having available jobs if the cost is people getting sick? Within a period of two years, three women who all work at the same place in Everett were diagnosed with breast cancer. The women all live in different cities. Coincidence? I don't know but it seems strange to me. During the time that Monsanto was open, studies were done about cancer clusters in Everett. The results were not very positive. Supposedly a study was done about six years ago but I do not know the results of that study or if it was ever completed. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2013 : 12:15:23 PM
|
Hard Rock, Rush Street Gaming possible new partners at Suffolk Downs
Casino vote to go forward
Two gambling companies familiar with Massachusetts, Hard Rock International and Rush Street Gaming, are emerging as top prospects to join a Suffolk Downs casino venture, days after the East Boston racetrack jettisoned Caesars Entertainment from the $1 billion project, say people familiar with Suffolk Downs’ search for a new partner.
Suffolk Downs was sent scrambling for a new partner on Friday, after learning that state investigators performing background checks on the partnership would recommend to the gambling commission that Caesars be deemed unsuitable to bid for a casino license, a shocking turn for one of the biggest names in the gambling business.
The casino project in the middle of a major shakeup faces a Nov. 5 East Boston referendum that cannot be delayed, said Secretary of State William F. Galvin.
“The ballots have been printed, they’ve been distributed and we know people have already voted,” said Galvin, referring to absentee voters. “Obviously we cannot have anything interfere with a municipal election.”
Suffolk Downs sought to regain its footing Monday by releasing a new television advertisement, in which chief operating officer Chip Tuttle explained that the track had “changed the company that will manage gaming operations here,” but maintained its commitment to developing “a world-class destination resort.” Full story for BostonGlobe.com subscribers.
David Abel of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Mark Arsenault can be reached at mark.arsenault@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @bostonglobemark.
|
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/25/2013 : 5:26:10 PM
|
Steve Wynn blasts commission’s ‘freshmen’ gaming regulators.
Friday, October 25, 2013
Las Vegas billionaire Steve Wynn says he was “flabbergasted” by a report that flagged Caesars as unsuitable to hold a Massachusetts casino license — then he blasted the state gaming board as “freshmen” regulators unfairly scrutinizing gambling execs.
“We find ourselves being treated, in many respects, as if they are doing us a favor,” Wynn said in a conference call with investors yesterday. “I am not real comfortable with that status ...
“If I was any other business and I was willing to spend the kind of money, create the kind of jobs that these states have requested, we would have the red carpet rolled out for us and the governor and everybody else would be delighted to talk to us,” Wynn said. “But if you are in the gaming business there is sort of a crummy presumption that you might be unsavory and that burns me up, to tell you the truth.”
Wynn, who is seeking a license to build a $1.4 billion casino in Everett, is awaiting a ruling on whether his company will pass the intense scrutiny of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission.
He also criticized the state gaming board as “freshmen” with an “unbelievable preoccupation that maybe a gangster is going to get in.” The gaming titan went on to say that one of his directors was pressed for proof of car ownership, while a member of his board who was married for 56 years was forced to provide the board a marriage license.
Asked about the criticism last night, state gaming board head Stephen Crosby said of Wynn: “He’s an esteemed businessman and he’s entitled to his opinions.”
Wynn’s comments come after Bay State investigators found Caesars unsuitable because of several issues, including a business associate’s reputed ties to Russian crime rings and the company’s huge debt.
“In my 47 years of business in the gaming industry, this is probably one of the most challenging, complex situations ... that I have ever faced,” Wynn said of the Massachusetts licensing process. “You sort of have to roll the dice.”
- See more at: You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Casino
