BestCraps.com

Senator From East Boston Prefers Casinos To Slots At Tracks

Posted on June 19th, 2010

News Sponsored by Online Vegas Casino

Rated 5 Stars by BestCraps.com

Read Review

Visit Casino

Download Software

————————————————

Senator Antony Petruccelli whose district includes East Boston where Suffolk Downs is located, and Revere where Wonderland Greyhound Park can be found, is actively endorsing the legalization of resort casinos and not slot machines at the racetracks. Suffolk and Wonderland, instead of competing with each other for a casino license, have decided to form a partnership headed by Richard Fields, owner of Suffolk Downs, and proposed to construct a resort-style, mega-complex casino in Eastern Massachusetts.

Petruccelli said Tuesday that he supports a resort casino at Suffolk Downs and he hopes that Suffolk’s time-honoured status in the thoroughbred racing industry would be valued and would be given due credit in the process of awarding the casino licenses. A bill that cleared the House last April provides for 750 slot machines at the state’s two horse racing tracks, Suffolk Downs in East Boston and Plainridge Racecourse in Plainville and two former dog racing tracks, Wonderland Greyhound Park in Revere and Raynham Park in Raynham. The bill also stipulates the creation of two casinos without laying down the locations.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo, the sponsor of the House gambling bill, whose district, like Petruccelli, also includes the communities where Suffolk and Wonderland are located, has been strongly pushing for slots at tracks for years. DeLeo, a son of a track worker has been actively campaigning for slots to prevent more job losses at the ailing racetracks as well as provide new revenues. Proponents of racetrack slots also say the existing tracks, if allowed to install slot machines, could immediately supply the state with new revenue while the casinos are being built.

On the other hand, the Senate version is a draft casino bill that calls for three resort casinos to be geographically distributed across Massachusetts, but has no provision for slot machines at the racetracks. Supporters of the Senate proposal argue the resort casinos would generate more employment than slots at tracks and could be more profitable since the casino sites would be spaced out across the state, thus curbing competition. Sen. Richard Ross, R-Wrentham, whose district includes Plainridge Racecourse, said last week that from his discussions with colleagues in the past weeks, he was more confident of slots at racetracks, and that it is quite likely that an amendment on slots at tracks would be filed and endorsed during debate. Sen. Marc Pacheco also expressed disapproval of the Senate bill’s exclusion of racetrack slots.

Senate Minority Leader Richard Tisei said Republicans would file an amendment that would allow the use of the gambling revenues to fund a property relief program that would refund property owners at the end of every year. Tisei also said they would also be amenable to allocating an amount for gambling addiction rehabilitation. Tisei said the GOP would also propose for a local referendum at the casino’s home community, because he said a casino could bring about a major transformation on the host community and residents should be given the right to be heard.

Already, senators and lobbyists are deliberating in private as to which of the Senators and Representatives would make up the conference committee that would reconcile the two conflicting bills once the Senate bill is passed. Senate leaders have planned to release the final bill on Friday and have scheduled floor debate starting Wednesday, June 23, after lawmakers have been given time to study the bill and file amendments which were initially due on Tuesday but was changed to Monday. Sen. Susan Tucker, a Democrat from Lawrence, objected to the Monday deadline for the filing of amendments, and is planning to ask for a Tuesday noon deadline during Friday’s informal session.