On November
22, 2011 Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed a bill calling for the
licensing of three casinos and one slots parlor. There have been numerous
twists and turns along the way, but I’ll focus on the single slots license,
which is closely tied to the fate of harness racing in Massachusetts. The
competition for that license has been, in contrast to the Marx Brothers style
battle over the casino licenses, by the book and devoid of theatrics. Well, not
entirely. In April Plainridge point man Gary Piontkowski was forced out when it
was discovered he’d helped himself to more than a million dollars from the
track money room over the course of a number of years. He claimed it was no big
deal. Some believed this surprise development would doom the Plainridge bid,
but Penn National Gaming of Pennsylvania swooped in and seized this opportunity
to gain a foothold in Massachusetts, and—not that it was high on their priority
list-- save the day for harness racing. The fact that they have extensive
experience dealing with the confluence of gaming and racing seemed to impress
the gaming commission.
With four
weeks to go until the slots license is awarded there are three applicants still
in play: Raynham Park, the Cordish Companies (Leominster), and Penn National.
All three have been deemed suitable by the commission and they all received
positive feedback from the local voters. Leominster is in the central part of
the state, while Plainville and Raynham are both south of Boston, with the
former being more to the west and handy to Rhode Island. Still, the towns are
only 20 miles apart along route 495.
Cordish has
the least desirable location of the three and I’d say they are the least likely
to win out. Raynham was a dog track until that form of racing was voted out in
a 2008 referendum; since that time they’ve been functioning as a simulcast center.
Their problem is that the governor granted the Wampanoag tribe the inside track
on the casino license for Southeastern Massachusetts. And their preference is
to build on land in Taunton, the town adjacent to Raynham. They have been slow
to get their act together and the vultures are circling; Foxwoods has joined
hands with the city of Fall River—20 miles south of Raynham—and they will be
submitting a bid. I assume the commission would prefer that the single slots
parlor not be in the same general vicinity as a casino, and the fact that there
are so many questions associated with the Southeastern Mass casino location is
not a plus for Raynham Park. Plainridge, on the other hand, is not close to a
potential casino.
While the
commission has supposedly been shielded from political influence, most of its
members were appointed by various politicians, so political clout can’t be
discounted. Gary Piontkowski is a Republican—not a popular breed on Beacon
Hill—and a pal of former US Senator Scot Brown. Not much leverage there.
Raynham, on the other hand, is owned and operated by 85-year-old George Carney,
who has been working Massachusetts politicians for most of his life and knows
how to get things done. His family has owned Raynham Park for 50 years. Part of
his property now holds a septic treatment plant and another area is used for
recycling construction materials. Carney has been hanging on, waiting for a
slots/casino license. This may represent a do or die situation for him, just as
it does for Plainridge, where 446 folks holding jobs directly linked to harness
racing would be out of work if that bid is rejected. The stakes are high.
Plainridge
races 100 days a year, from April to November. George Carney owns the Brockton
Fairgrounds, which has a track and a grandstand. As part of his proposal he has
pledged to present harness racing there for a relatively brief period during
the summer. His partner, Greenwood Racing, has agreed to put five or six
million dollars into refurbishing the track and facilities. The fact that
Plainridge would save harness racing from extinction in Massachusetts is a
major selling point for that proposal and I’m sure Carney and his partners felt
they needed to make a good will gesture to the sport, but I can’t see it making
a difference.
Another
strange angle to this story—after all, it is Massachusetts—is that a powerful
citizens’ campaign to repeal the casino law has been launched, and they are
determined to get a question on the ballot in November. The case is currently
before the Supreme Judicial Court. Each applicant for a casino/slots license
cut a non-refundable $400,000 check to the state just to get into the game, and
all of them have spent millions more on architects, lobbyists, lawyers etc. How
could the state tell them nine months from now that the whole thing was an
April Fools’ Day joke? Caesar’s is already suing the commission chairman over
the way they were dealt with in the Suffolk Downs debacle. The decision on the
slots license is due on February 28. Plainridge, which has already built a
garage and retrofitted their building, promised the commission they would have
the slots parlor up and running within six months of getting the license. That
would be a couple of months before the ballot question appears before the
voters. How stupid is that? Do you tell them to just shut it down? So if the
good government casino haters get their way chaos will ensue.
Putting that
insanity aside, Penn National has garnered support from local businesses by
signing agreements with them. For instance, instead of building a hotel, they
will funnel customers to existing hotels in the area. The track has also
developed strong ties within the community over the years, and signed on Doug
Flutie to be the face of the operation. While the Leominster proposal is
rootless and uninspiring, and the Raynham proposal is at the mercy of the
casino that could wind up next door, there is really no downside to Plainridge.
The highway infrastructure is unmatched by any of the other slots or casino
proposals; the survival of an industry comes along with it as a bonus; and the
company behind it is absolutely solid. Yes, I’ve made up my mind: the slots
license will go to Plainridge.
JF
No comments:
Post a Comment