Roll Of The Dice

In the last couple of years Massachusetts officials have gotten rather tired of seeing people with gambling problems driving over the border into Connecticut and Rhode Island to throw their money away at casinos in those states. It is not that they are worried about these people's ability to pay bills or anything, they would just like them to waste their money gambling at an establishment which may eventually allow Massachusetts to get its hands on that cash. That is why over the last couple of years there has a been a big push by lawmakers to find an area where someone could build a large resort casino in Massachusetts. First there was talk Patriots owner Bob Kraft would team with Steve Wynn and build a casino in Foxboro across from the stadium. Knowing how awful that section of Route 1 is on a normal game day the people of Foxboro couldn't shoot that idea down fast enough and Kraft quickly cut his losses (after all, he still has to live with these people). Wynn simply found a new partner and a new site, this time up in Everett where there is already a horse racing track (you know, because horse racing is thriving in America). But even beyond that plan I have heard about roughly seven different possible locations for casinos in pretty much every direction. Yesterday there were two separate casino votes (one out in Palmer and the other in Everett) and both lost. The supporters of the Everett plan say they will ask for recount but the Palmer casino appears to be pretty much done. I can't totally say I am surprised.

Most Massachusetts residents appear to have the same attitude for all the proposals: "It wouldn't be the worst thing to have a casino in Massachusetts... provided it isn't anywhere near my town." And as someone who doesn't really gamble and therefore doesn't have a horse in this race, I can totally understand where they are coming from. Sure, casinos bring a few jobs and money to the town but they also proven to bring a higher crime rate and lots of traffic. Living in the suburbs is mostly about personal space and you can't have that when every street is clogged with busloads of people looking to chain-smoke and play the quarter slots. (Unrelated rant: the Governor doesn't seem too concerned about all the Massachusetts-based shuttle bus companies who ferry people to and from these casinos - companies he is about to put out of business.) Also, I think the attitude townspeople can take toward an establishment is very different when they were there first. People hate change which is why it is harder to take down something once it has been completed. Better to just stop it from going up in the first place, just in case. For example, a couple years ago a woman who had just moved into town filed a noise complaint against Norwood Airport. She lost, almost exclusively mostly because the airport was there first and she should have known that before bought her house. However, when the airport tried to expand the runway to accommodate larger planes, they were rejected. I think the other problem for these casinos is that they are trying to build massive complexes. When people are already skeptical about your presence antagonizing them by planning to obstruct their view is every direction is not the way to build up good will in the community. If they started smaller they may have had a chance.

They say real estate is all about location, location, location which is why I think if they really want to get a casino in the state they are probably looking in the wrong area. This is going to sound crazy given how congested the city is, but maybe they should be looking a little closer to Boston. I'm not going to suggest something nuts like Allston or Brookline (could you imagine the protests?) but Dorchester could use the business. I actually think there would be more people open to the idea than you would expect. I've noticed this very weird distinction between city dwellers and suburbanites - city dwellers want to live in an area in which they can walk to every thing they could ever need. Meanwhile, because suburbanites have to own cars they have no issue driving to other towns to get what they need and this way of life has resulted in an attitude which states they would rather have most things located in other towns so they don't have to deal with them during their day-to-day lives. It's like this - everyone knows their town needs a sewer treatment plant they don't want it to be in the backyard. o while suburbanites freak out at the very notion of a casino in their town plenty of Bostonians would just shrug and say something annoying about how the landscape is always changing. And on the business side, a town full of college kids who could walk to the casino and have no idea how bad their odds really are would be pretty appealing. Everett may not have been enthusiastic about the idea but they don't speak for the entire region.

Still, I will be curious to see how many groups decide to keep fighting this fight because at some point it just won't be worth the legal fees anymore. But I'm sure these casino bosses aren't used to taking no for an answer and had to know they were in for a long fight about this. After all, there is a reason people back in the 1940s were building their casinos in Las Vegas - at the time there were about 10 people in that city to complain about it, so they could do whatever they wanted. Plus, at this point the blood is in the water. The people of Massachusetts have shown an interest in the idea of a casino in our state and these resort developers aren't going to miss an opportunity to make even one dollar less than they think they can get. It's why I have this sneaking suspicion that even with last night's defeat the talk of a casino in Massachusetts won't go away. There is a feeling of inevitability about the discussion and now it will just be about finding a community who won't put up too much of a fight. These developers either need to find a town who is willing to try and deal with all the bad side of gambling in the hopes some good will come out of it, or pray the state dictates where construction will take place and removes any chance for residents to have a say in the matter. (If you know anything about the residents of Massachusetts you probably know that tactic wouldn't go over too well.) Sadly, though, I think it will just end up being a reminder that even if you start the night off on a hot streak eventually the house always wins.