On Wednesday, Mayor Joe Petty sent out an endorsement of 10 of the 11 city councilors who support authorizing City Manager Michael O'Brien to negotiate a community host agreement with the developer, Mass Gaming & Entertainment LLC., interested in putting a slot casino in Worcester. If a host agreement is reached, voters in Worcester will get a chance to vote on the referendum, which will include the host community agreement. If the city manager is not authorized to negotiate the agreement or can't come to one he feels would make the slot parlor beneficial for the city, then the slot casino referendum would stop there. For City Councilor Konstantina Lukes, having the referendum squashed would be ideal because she believes bringing a slot parlor to Worcester ins't a positive thing.
WORCESTER — On Wednesday, Mayor Joseph Petty sent out an endorsement of 10 of the 11 city councilors who support authorizing City Manager Michael O'Brien to negotiate a community host agreement with the developer interested in putting a slot casino in Worcester, Mass Gaming & Entertainment LLC. If a host agreement is reached, voters in Worcester will get a chance to vote on the slot casino referendum, which will include the host community agreement. If the city manager is not authorized to negotiate the agreement or can't come to one he feels would make the slot parlor beneficial for the city, then the referendum would stop there.
For City Councilor Konstantina Lukes, having the referendum squashed would be ideal. She believes bringing a slots parlor to Worcester would be a negative thing for the city.
"[A slots parlor casino] should not be here," said Lukes. "It's not the kind of industry or economic development that is going to be productive in the long-run. Short-term, dangling money in front of a community that is losing money to non-profits and to a 14-acre eyesore is tempting. But what I'm saying is the the city has other economic tools. We don't have to go to economic development based on a vice that's not productive and foots money out of its citizens and sucks life out of the neighborhood."
The memo from the mayor came after Tuesday's City Council meeting where Lukes exercised her right under council rules to put off the authorization vote until the council's next meeting. The motion has been tabled for April 23rd, but that hasn't stopped Lukes from asking her fellow city council members to tell the public where they stand on the idea of bringing a slot parlor to Worcester.
"What I am asking, simply, from the other councilors is stand up and be counted," said Lukes. "If you have an opinion on this, you have an obligation to tell the voters what your opinion is — positive or negative, pro or con."
District 5 Councilor William Eddy feels it is not the council's place to tell the voters how they feel about the issue. He says it's the public's decision and the city should go through the process put in place by the state.
"We have consistently said we are not going to substitute the will of the city council on this matter for the will of the community," said Eddy. "A project this big and on an issue that is clearly such a public issue that the city should decide this [with a vote]. The state put a process in place that calls for that, and the council is not going to get in the way of the state law or try to influence how the people of this community are going to vote."
Part of the problem, according to Lukes, is election year politics. Plus, the slot proposal has a lot of potential money for the city riding on it, including a new luxury hotel.
"We have a lot of money being dangled in front of us and you add that to the fact that it's an election year and everyone is going to be emotional and reactive and we're going to have these dust-ups going on from now to the vote," said Lukes. "It's unfortunately a political fact of life."
Tabling a Vote
In response to Lukes' tabling of the vote, Mayor Petty's office, with the support of 10 of 11 councilors, sent out the following statement in a press release:
Last night a motion was made on the floor of the City Council, “That the City Council of the City of Worcester in accordance with state law, does hereby authorize the City Manager to negotiate a community host agreement with the intention of placing this document before the people of this community so that they may exercise their right to be educated and to vote on this all important topic.”
This order is endorsed by: Mayor Petty, Councilor Economou, Councilor Eddy, Councilor Germain, Councilor O’Brien, Councilor Palmieri, Councilor Rivera, Councilor Rushton, Councilor Russell, Councilor Toomey.
This order is not an endorsement by the council of the proposed slot parlor. This order is to request the City Manager to negotiate the best host agreement on behalf of the residents.
It is not our purview to decide if gaming is right or wrong or should or shouldn’t happen. Gaming is coming to Massachusetts - that is a fact. What is our purview is to make sure the developers who have selected Worcester as their preferred location have a full understanding of our community.
This decision will not be one forced down upon anyone. Nor will it be without significant public participation and nor will it be anyone but the voters who ultimately decide if we have a slot parlor in the City.
What we pledge to you is that we will fight for the best agreement we can get. We pledge we will make sure every voter in the City of Worcester has the accurate information to make an informed decision at the polls."
Councilor Palmeiri, speaking about Monday's Public Hearing on the host community agreement, echoed the statement sent out by the mayor.
"I think what we're interested in was or is the continuation of a discussion from those that live in the city about what they would want in an agreement that could be voted on," said Palmieri. "We know there is a particular part of the population that is against it, but if it passes we'd like to know what infrastructure issues that they're concerned about that they'd like part of the package -- transportation issues, or if not transportation, pedestrian and street traffic issues and the interconnection to the community."
When asked what she would put in the host agreement, Lukes told MassLive.com she'd like to see the developers give the residents in the neighborhood who have lived there for at least one full year $25,000 each year as long as the slot parlor is operational. She also suggested switching the proposed hotel and the slot parlor locations.
"If they really think the slot parlor is such a good idea, let's put the hotel in Green Island and put the slots parlor in City Square," said Lukes.
When will the city host a gaming referendum?
Under Massachusetts Gaming Commission regulations, a referendum election on the gaming question must be scheduled no less than 60 days and not more than 90 days after the signing of the community host agreement by the city manager. This means if the city wanted to the issue to be voted upon the same day as the June 25 Senate election, the city manager would have to have a signed host agreement by April 26. The council will vote on April 23rd to let him begin negotiating with Mass Gaming & Entertainment LLC, potentially leaving just a three-day negotiating window.
This is all unlikely to take place so quickly, as the Worcester Telegram & Gazette* reported. The city manager has told the council he wants them to review the agreement before signing it.
*Worcester Telegram & Gazette articles may require a subscription.