It comes down to this: We’re not Las Vegas. And frankly that’s a good thing.
So this one casino that is to be built in Greater Boston needs to reflect and be sensitive to the locality it will be part of. That’s a tall order, and so the state Gaming Commission has spent months analyzing the two proposals — one for a Wynn Resorts in Everett and the other Mohegan Sun’s plan for Revere — and taking public testimony as well.
And while there is a certain appeal to the prospect of turning a toxic Superfund site in Everett into a glitzy resort casino, it’s the Mohegan Sun proposal that hands down has more going for it — and for the communities it will impact.
What started out as a casino proposal by and at Suffolk Downs has, of course, now evolved into one where the Revere portions of the track’s footprint provide the site, Suffolk Downs will essentially be the landlord and the operators of the very successful Connecticut-based Mohegan Sun will build and operate the proposed $1.3 billion complex.
Since it entered the picture, Mohegan has successfully negotiated a generous host community agreement with the city of Revere and pacts with 12 other surrounding communities, including Boston, that promise to pump $52 million annually into those cities and towns. Commitments for one-time payments to Revere ($33 million) and Boston ($10 million) and nearly $40 million in transportation improvement are also impressive. If that constitutes “buying” support, well, bring it on.
Mohegan has also committed to spending more than $50 million on goods and services from local vendors within a 15-mile radius of the casino and hiring 75 percent of its staff within that same radius. And there is also a binding agreement in place to keep Suffolk Downs and its 850 jobs alive.
From every fiscal angle Mohegan remains a better deal for the community than the Wynn offering.
Their commitment to spread the wealth via their “Momentum Rewards” program that provides casino patrons financial incentives to shop at or visit more than 400 local restaurants, attractions and museums provides further evidence of their efforts to support the community they will be a part of.
The other issue that has emerged as a stumbling block for Wynn in recent days is the panning of their design by the Massachusetts chapter of the American Institute of Architects, which found their Las Vegas-style tower not a good match for the surroundings, in particular for its waterfront location. The Mohegan design (illustration shown at left) they found “markedly superior” in every way. Amateur critics though we may be, we concur.
There are also those aspects of the rival groups and proposals that are difficult to quantify, but that leave a lasting impression. They include the laundry list of changes the Wynn operatives would like to make in the original gaming legislation. It speaks to an unpleasant “we know this business” attitude that ignores the political realities of how this all came to pass.
That brings us to the ultimate political reality — the fact that come November the voters of Massachusetts will have it within their power to nullify this whole process and simply opt out of the casino business entirely. We certainly hope that won’t happen, that this modest and well-crafted foray into casino gambling will be allowed to proceed. But the addition of a New England-based operation to the mix and the sensitivities to community values it brings can only help that effort.