In the topsy-turvy casino landscape over the last few weeks, City Manager Jay Ash took pause to figure out if supporting expanded gaming was such a good idea.
Following two unsuccessful votes for casino proposals in East Boston and Palmer last week, he said he questioned his support.
That has faded away this week as Ash has pledged his support to a controversial and last-minute plan by Suffolk Downs to scrap the long-time casino plan at the track and propose a scaled-down version of it on only the Revere side of the property.
The hurdles and headaches for such a bargain are tremendous, but track officials and some local officials are fully behind that.
Now, add Ash to the list of supporters.
“I am now convinced Revere has a viable option and I’m in support of it and of Mayor Rizzo’s efforts,” Ash said on Tuesday. “Last week, we took a step back and analyzed the idea of expanded gaming. After looking at it, I’m convinced the foundations of my support should continue, all the positives are still there and there were extenuating circumstances with the East Boston vote – that being Caesars dropped out at the last minute. To the extent that I have any weight, I throwing it behind the Revere proposal.”
That decision came after a late-afternoon meeting at Revere City Hall on Tuesday, a meeting that Rizzo had called for and in which he explained the ins and outs of the 11th hour bid.
Ash said Rizzo had reached out to several local leaders and wanted to talk to all of them about continuing to support Suffolk’s plan.
ALWAYS THE PLAN?
The plan by Suffolk brings up more hurdles and obstacles than in a steeplechase race, including the possibility of closing or moving the horse track and the clarification as to whether the vote in Revere actually qualifies.
The new Revere-only plan began to hit the public square before the final voting numbers had even been reported, with most people hearing and reacting in a confused manner as it was always predominately understood that the casino development was a joint effort and required a joint ‘yes’ vote.
However, Suffolk Downs COO Chip Tuttle said this week that he has always indicated that there could be an alternative if there were a ‘no’ vote in Eastie – though that alternative was never discussed in depth as they were planning for victory.
“The people were voting on a land use question, not on a specific project,” said Tuttle. “We’re very disappointed in the results in East Boston. I can think of three or four things we should have done better. Clearly, our 11th hour separation from Caesars didn’t help. We are trying to respect the vote in East Boston, which clearly killed the prior project. That project can’t move forward in East Boston. By the same token, we have a ‘yes’ in Revere by a wider margin than the loss in East Boston and a workforce here that deserves every opportunity from us.
“That may be frustrating to some; I get it,” he continued. “It was a possibility we were asked about on five or six occasions. Every time I tried to be consistent with that answer and I said that practically it would be very, very difficult to move ahead in one and not the other. Technically, I always said it was possible. We didn’t want to talk about that. We were planning for success.”
SUPPORT VARIES
The range of support for the plan varies amongst elected officials in the area.
While Ash is in support – along with Rizzo – incoming Boston Mayor Marty Walsh has advocated for the license to go to Milford.
Meanwhile, State Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein has pledged her support fully behind the new plan, while House Speaker Bob DeLeo has remained somewhat neutral – saying he will leave it all up to the MGC.
Finally, State Sen. Anthony Petruccelli of East Boston – one of the drafters of the Gaming Law – said he is fully against the plan. He has also said that Suffolk Downs is trying to pit Revere and Eastie against one another, something he said he resents.
Petruccelli represents both communities in the state senate.
UP TO THE GAMING COMMISSION
In the end, everyone agrees that the fate of the last-minute plan at Suffolk will depend upon the MGC.
MGC Chair Steve Crosby has only said so far that he will hear them out, though he has said in published reports that it sounds very difficult. He has also alluded that it would be a long shot.
However, in previous open meetings, such as a meeting on Oct. 29 addressing the Eastie/Revere referendum vote, Crosby alluded that a ‘no’ vote would put an end to the application.
“There will be another public hearing during the evaluation process if the vote is successful,” Crosby said at the hearing. “If it isn’t successful, it’s over. If it is successful there will be another public hearing where we will invite everybody to speak about the pending proposal.”
Said Tuttle, “In the end, all of this is in the Gaming Commission’s hands.”
SEPARATION OF THE TRACK
One of the persistent problems with the new plan is what to do with the horse track.
At one point, the casino was touted as being necessary to save the track. Now, it appears the track is going to have to be separated in some fashion to save the casino.
Just how that will happen is still up in the air.
Tuttle said there is a very good possibility that the track could close, or that it would operate as a separate entity with no common access points. He even said it could possibly be moved to another location. Under the current plan, the barns would certainly have to be moved. Tuttle said it certainly would be off-site, but they have no firm plans yet.
“Our plan was always for an integrated facility with racing and gaming,” he said. “That cannot happen now because of the vote. There has to be separation; there has to be church and state. They can’t be together. We hope to be able to keep the racetrack, but it can’t be part of our gaming development…We’re going to work to try to keep the track open, but the results of the vote in East Boston could make that hard. We don’t know yet (if we’ll close it)…We’ve got 350 people who work here and 400 to 500 in the barn areas and we’re trying to figure out how to preserve their jobs.”
One of two major roadblocks is the fact that the racetrack is considered an amenity to the development, and any amenity located in a city or town triggers the host community process. Eastie cannot be a host community. The track being an amenity worked in Revere’s favor early in the process and helped it be deemed a host community. However, now it appears to be getting in the way of the Revere-only development.
Tuttle said they had no clear answers as to how they would solve that.
“That’s something we’re working on right now,” he said.
Another roadblock lies within the gaming law – a stipulation that requires Suffolk to continue operating as a horse track in order to get a casino license.
“We need to find a way to continue racing, but not as part of the development,” he said. “We don’t necessarily have to race here. It says if you held a [racing] license in 2011 and are awarded a gaming license, you have to maintain that [racing] license. It doesn’t say where you have to race. We’re meeting with the (Horsemen) this week to discuss the new playing field.”
This article –
Ash Will Throw Support Behind Revere Casino