The pioneering Massachusetts gaming expansion law of 2011, which authorized three casino resorts and one slots parlor, did something that no state gaming law had ever done before, create a process for minimizing the strain of such facilities on local infrastructure, roads and schools.
First, the law said that no community could be forced to accept a casino. And that any community had the right to negotiate a Host Community Agreement that could include mitigations for impacts on schools, housing, police and emergency services. Such agreements had to be voted on by the host population. Such an agreement was supposed to anticipate possible impacts ahead of time. It also prevented a casino applicant from bringing its proposal to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission before it had reached agreements with each of the communities surrounding the casino that might be impacted by it.
Those agreements are expected to generate about $1 billion over the 15-year lives of the casino licenses and the five-year slots license. That money will be used to mitigate transportation impacts. There is also a Community Mitigation Fund controlled by the commission that can dole out monies to address other impacts that no one may have thought of.
That same law mandated an ongoing research project designed to determine what effect gaming has on society, including crime, property values, lottery sales, employment, even bankruptcies. The data gained will be fed into a huge database that will be rather unique in the United States.
So far this program has gathered data on the first year of operation of the Plainridge Park Casino in Plainville. It has found no connection between the casino and crime rates, although it has impacted traffic incidents, but only insofar that increased business to the casino creates increased traffic.
As the casinos come online they will contribute towards the Public Health Trust Fund which will spent as much as $20 million annual on research to promote responsible gaming and fight gambling addiction.
Worry about Connecticut Casino
As much as the state of Connecticut worries about the MGM Springfield, the treasurer of the Bay State is even more worried about the effect of a Connecticut casino on the revenues of the Springfield Casino. That puts her right there in the court with MGM itself.
The proposed third tribal casino would be located 13 miles from the MGM. Treasurer Deborah Goldberg last week told a state lawmaker, “If I were the mayor of Springfield and I were MGM, that would be a very grave concern to me.” She made the comment during a hearing on the budget held by the Ways and Means Committee
Goldberg, who was originally very concerned that the opening of the Plainridge Park Casino in Plainville would affect state lottery revenues, no longer has that worry. In fact, she says, the casino, which hosts Lottery kiosks, has become one of the Lottery’s “best customers.” However, when she was asked by Rep. Todd Smola her thoughts on the Connecticut casino’s effect on the MGM, she predicted some drop in projected revenues.
She added that MGM (which is scheduled to open in 2018) “will have ways of attracting people in, and it will be fresh and new and up and running before Foxwoods can react.” She also clarified that she has no expertise in casinos. “So it’s hard to speculate.”
