Making A Casino Compromise In Massachusetts
Early next year the legislature will consider allowing casino gambling in Massachusetts. There are reasonable concerns found on both sides of this issue. Supporters point to job creation and much-needed revenue for the state, while opponents of the proposal point out the social costs, and costs to families.
Recently a poll was published that shows that although a majority of state residents are in favor of having casinos in the commonwealth, they oppose one being built in their home town.
If we are going to allow casino gambling in Massachusetts we need to consider what we can do to ensure that these businesses not only create jobs and provide a valuable source of revenue for the state, but that they can coexist with healthy communities.
Regional Impact
It is estimated that the proposed casino in Milford would create up to 7,000 jobs at the casino itself, which, according to the developers’ proposal, will include a hotel, a nightclub, restaurants and retail businesses.
Proponents of the project claim small businesses in the area will prosper from the larger customer base, but some suggest that there is a risk that these casino-related businesses will attract patrons away from locally-owned hotels and stores. This could potentially cost the community jobs. In addition, many local residents may lose money gambling at the casino, which could, by taking money from residents’ pockets, leave them less to spend — hurting the local economy and job market.
The economic impact is not the only issue of interest or concern to communities hosting — and surrounding — the areas of these proposed casinos. Growing pains are inevitable: There will be greater demands for government services as new residents enroll their children in public schools; the influx of tourists will necessitate a larger police force to maintain public safety. But for the host towns, these will be paid for by new revenue from property and income taxes, as well as any profit-sharing agreement the town may make with the casino.
However, in the surrounding communities, which may have similar expenses, they will not. We must take into consideration that if any town adjacent to a casino can demonstrate additional expenses resulting directly or indirectly from the establishment of the resort, they should be given a share of the casino’s revenue as well.
Wherever we fall on the question of whether or not expanding gambling is a good idea for the state, now may be our only chance. New Hampshire is weighing the option of opening three casinos whose viability will depend almost entirely on the gambling dollars of Massachusetts residents, and therefore upon whether we expand gambling in Massachusetts to draw that revenue for ourselves.
That we are in a fiscal crisis cannot be denied: The state needs the revenue, and in this dire economy we surely need the jobs. But proponents of the bill must accept that if we are to bring casinos into the commonwealth, steps must be taken to ensure that this additional revenue does not come at the expense of the quality of life in our communities.
Tom Sannicandro is a state representative serving the town of Ashland and precincts of Framingham. He can be reached at rep.tomsannicandro@hou.state.ma.us.
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments