BOSTON — Leaders of two gambling companies are considering their next steps after voters in Palmer and East Boston on Tuesday rejected plans for proposed casinos, possibly further reducing the number of applicants to open the state’s first destination resort casino.
The Mohegan Sun said Wednesday it would file a petition in Palmer, seeking a recount of votes on Tuesday as soon as possible, while 78-year-old Suffolk Downs in East Boston said it is examining the possibility of moving its project to Revere.
Clyde W. Barrow, director of the Center for Policy Analysis at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, said that Massachusetts could be on the edge of “a real mess,” if another casino referendum goes down in Milford this month and giant casino companies in Everett and Springfield fail state background investigations.
“Those two votes throw the whole process into a spiral,” Barrow said of the defeats in East Boston and Palmer. “We were already moving slower than any other state in the country.”
The Mohegan Sun’s proposed $1 billion casino resort lost by 93 votes in Palmer, out of 5,221 cast, stunning supporters and elating opponents. The project was narrowly defeated by 51 to 49 percent.
By 56 to 44 percent, East Boston voters on Tuesday defeated a proposal to build a $1 billion casino at the Suffolk Downs race track but the project was approved by voters in the adjacent city of Revere. The project had been located in both communities. Leaders at Suffolk Downs are now looking into the possibility of moving the casino entirely into Revere in an effort to keep it alive.
Stephen P. Crosby, chairman of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, said the process worked as intended in the state’s casino law, with voters in East Boston and Palmer deciding referendums on the projects in their communities.
Crosby said the commission still expects successful applicants for casino resorts in Greater Boston and Western Massachusetts, though the results of background investigations are still pending for planned casinos in Springfield, Milford and Everett.
Artists’ renderings of the proposed MGM Springfield (above) and Mohegan Sun Massachusetts casinos.
“That’s not to pre-judge anything,” Crosby said. “We’ve not seen the background checks.”
Crosby said that if Suffolk attempts to advance the project only in Revere, then the five-member commission will meet and discuss the proposal. There will clearly be no casino in East Boston, but the commission is not ruling out allowing Suffolk to move ahead in the licensing process for a casino in Revere based on the Revere vote, Crosby said.
“What else can happen in Revere?” Crosby said. “We just don’t know. We are open to ideas.”
“Time is getting short,” Crosby added. “It’s not going to be easy to put a new horse and rider together.”
If they clear background checks, companies must submit final applications for casino resorts by Dec. 31.
The state’s 2011 casino law allows up to three casino resorts in different regions of the state including one for Western Massachusetts and one for Greater Boston.
Casino companies need to pass background investigations into their ethics and finances in order to file final applications for resorts.
Crosby said the commission would probably start the licensing process from scratch in Western Massachusetts if MGM Springfield fails its background check next month. Crosby said he was reluctant to discuss the possibility of starting over in Western Massachusetts because he is assuming at least one applicant will get to the finish line.
West Springfield voters in September turned down a proposed casino by Hard Rock International while the mayor of Springfield rejected a plan by Penn National Gaming. Another casino company pulled out of the city about a year ago after buying land in East Springfield.
“In Western Massachusetts, we’ve lost four applicants,” Crosby said. “We still have one.”
MGM last month passed a similar background investigation for a proposed casino in Maryland and has said several times that it is confident of clearing the investigation on ethics and finances in Massachusetts.
Springfield voters in July overwhelmingly approved an MGM casino planned for the South End of the city.
MGM could possibly be found unsuitable in Massachusetts because of its ties to business leader Pansy Ho, who has a minority ownership of the MGM Grand Macau. Ho is the daughter of Macau casino owner Stanley Ho, who was linked to Chinese organized crime in a 2009 report by New Jersey investigators.
Also in Greater Boston, Stephen Wynn, the CEO of Wynn Resorts, recently suggested he was unhappy with the commission’s process for background investigations, raising doubts about the future of its project in Everett and whether it will survive an investigation considering its operations in Macau.
Fears about the background reports arose when Caesars Entertainment Corp. last month dropped out of its more than two-year-old partnership with Suffolk. Investigators for the commission had recommended against a license for Caesars, partly because of its $23.7 billion in debt and partly for its connections to a hotel group that had an investor with alleged links to organized crime in Russia.
In the southeast, the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe could receive a regional monopoly for its planned casino in Taunton, but some legislators in the region doubt that the tribe will win federal approval to take its land into trust.
Also in the competition for the license in Greater Boston, a group that includes Foxwoods in Connecticut faces a high bar in winning approval for its casino planned for Milford. Voters in Milford are scheduled to cast ballots on Nov. 19. If voters approve the referendum, Foxwoods would then need approval of at least two thirds of a special town meeting in December in order to rezone the property planned for the casino.
The commission is still on track to award a single license in early January for a slots-only facility being sought by applicants in Raynham, Plainville and Leominster.
Material from the Associated Press was used, and staff writer Lori Stabile contributed.
Open all references in tabs: [1 – 9]