Casino debate continues at counties conference

Sunday, April 06, 2008
By STEPHANIE BARRYsbarry@repub.com
NORTHAMPTON - It's not often that a moot point draws so much debate.

But, as one casino gambling expert told an audience of elected officials yesterday, the subject is nothing if not divisive.

"I find myself scribbling down 'yes' and 'no' votes," at community meetings on expanded gambling, John Robertson, deputy director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, said during a panel discussion at the 2008 Municipal Conference for Franklin and Hampshire counties. "A lot of times I find my (tally) is right down the middle."

Even his own association has been unable to come to a consensus on casino gaming, he said.

That seemed to be no problem for the House of Representatives recently, however.

Members thumped Gov. Deval L. Patrick's casino plan with a 108-46 vote on March 20, despite promises of $400 million in annual revenues for the cash-strapped commonwealth.

"Presiding offices are very influential," state Sen. Stanley C. Rosenberg, D-Amherst, said of House Speaker Salvatore F. Dimasi's strident and successful campaign against the bill.

"There are moral questions, there are principle questions, there are values questions and operational questions," added Rosenberg, among the hosts of yesterday's conference at the Clarion Hotel, which drew about 160 elected officials - from selectmen to commission members - from 45 communities.

Patrick's plan appeared to be designed to preempt a plan by an American Indian tribe to build its own casino in Middleborough, with no input from the state.

Also on the agenda yesterday were panel discussions on education, planning, transportation, environmental and budgetary issues. The conference featured state legislative leaders and cabinet members as panelists.

Though the House vote rendered the casino argument theoretical for now, panelists yesterday predicted the debate will be revived before long.

"I'm sure this issue will rise again ... at a time when we have limited resources we can count on," said Daniel O'Connell, state secretary of housing and economic development, and the second of three on the casino panel yesterday.

O'Connell was chairman of an internal study group convened by Patrick, he said, noting that impartial studies on casinos are hard to come by since many existing ones have been financed by casino owners.

O'Connell offered a broad outline of Patrick's bill and its proposed concessions for infrastructure and social concerns triggered by resort casinos. His bill included trust funds for "community mitigation" and to handle compulsive gambling issues. He said a $50 million earmark to address gambling addiction was by far the most generous in the country.

Some audience members were not convinced by the numbers.

"I've never been able to reconcile to the fact that the government is encouraging the public to gamble ... I'm just wondering the morality of this and if you see a problem," Amherst

Conservation Commission member Eleanor Manire-Gatti asked, during a question and answer session that drew a variety of responses on both sides of the issue.

Also on the panel was Craig Stepno of State Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill's office, who touted the $892 million local aid the Lottery generates. He also noted Cahill has come out in favor of casinos, even if they imperil Lottery revenues.