Plainridge Park Casino in Plainville has fallen so short of expectations that the state is cutting its expectations of tax revenue by 40 percent.
Although the slots parlor was intended to drain considerable revenue from Rhode Island’s Twin River Casino in Lincoln, less than a dozen miles away, it has largely failed to do so since it opened on June 24.
State budget officials had expected the casino to generate about $262 million annually, but now that expectation has been lowered to $160 million.
According to the State House News Service that means that “fiscal 2016 state revenues associated with slot machines at Plainridge Park Casino are now expected to total $83 million, a $22 million reduction from the original estimate of $105 million.” The state collects 49 percent of total slots revenues.
Commission Chairman Stephen Crosby conceded, “Yes, tax revenues are less than what we expected, but so far Plainridge has produced more than $30 million in taxes that the commonwealth would not have without Plainridge.”
The casino’s vice president and general manager, Lance George recently told the commission to expect lower revenues during the holidays, although if the weather is good in the spring March, April and May could be the casino’s best months, he said.
Twin River is considered more competitive than Plainridge because it has table games and Plainridge is limited to 1,250 machines.
Industry experts note that in such a high population area with high income that small changes in quality and quantity can make a big difference when it comes to attracting customers.
Slots in Suffolk County?
The Bay State could have a second slots parlor, this one at the existing Suffolk Downs racetrack, if voters adopt a ballot question that Attorney General Maura Healey and Secretary of State William Galvin recently certified for next year.
The proponent of the initiative is a developer who would like to buy the Suffolk Downs property and build a slots casino and hotel side by side.
Opponents in Revere and East Boston have already gone to court to challenge the initiative, which is so narrowly written to apply to a small area in Suffolk County that it shouldn’t be on a statewide ballot, they say. They filed a petition with the Supreme Judicial Court.
The initiative does not name a specific geographic location, but does state that the casino could only be located on four acres adjacent to a racetrack and within 1,500 feet of horse racing. The description only applies to one location in Massachusetts.
The two communities have previously fought off two attempts to put a casino at the racetrack. Matt Cameron, representing the opponents, told the Boston Globe,
“You’re talking about the entire state voting on what happens in one of maybe two or three places. I still think that’s too narrow.”
The initiative would amend the existing 2011 gaming expansion law to allow a second slots parlor. The first is located in Plainville. It opened in June.
In the complaint the opponents state that the initiative would, “by law, geography, fair implication, and actual recent public statements made by the Petition’s filer himself restrict the newly available license to gaming establishment proposals in the immediate vicinity of Suffolk Downs.”
MGM Springfield
Mild weather in Massachusetts is assisting road contractors to complete some paving projects ahead of schedule in the same area where the state will be conducting a $183.3 million rehabilitation of two miles of Interstate 91.
This could help the MGM Springfield to open earlier than anticipated. Right now that date is 2018. Ever since the voters of Springfield approved of the project in 2014 and the gaming commission awarded it the license for the Western part of the state, the project has been pulled to and fro, so much so that it has strained the relationship between MGM and its biggest supporter, Mayor Domenic Sarno.
Finishing the paving project might not actually help the casino open earlier than 2018, but it could indicate real progress. The development prompted the Republican, based in Springfield to declare on its editorial pages: “It’s a break and a welcomed one. For all the debate and confusion that has followed this project for the past several months, it’s a sign of getting back on schedule and toward a fruitful conclusion.”
Meanwhile, on December 21 the Springfield city council will consider approving of a casino overlay district in the footprint of the casino resort that would create special zoning guidelines for the project and make it easier to proceed.
Approving of the overlay would allow MGM to begin early work such as demolition and infrastructure. It would NOT give approval to the developer’s proposed changes to the project, including cutting its size by 10 percent and replacing the 25-story hotel with a six-story hotel with the same number of rooms, but relocated.
“This approval will allow MGM to continue prep work on the site, and that’s all,” said a city official. “Changes such as elimination of the tower will not be discussed or voted on until the January hearings.”
