Tribe renews casino quest
DAVID KIBBE,TIMES BOSTON BUREAU
The Aquinnah Wampanoag quietly reveal their plan to build a casino in the New Bedford area.
BOSTON - When the state Legislature held a hearing on casino gambling last winter, the auditorium was no more than half-full and just as subdued. Five years ago, it would have been raucous.
That's how far casino gambling had slipped off the charts since 1997, when the House overwhelmingly killed a proposal for an Aquinnah Wampanoag casino in Southeastern Massachusetts.
No one was proposing a casino this winter. And except for a handful of crusading legislators, no one seemed to care.
All that changed this week, when the Aquinnah Wampanoag surprised state lawmakers by quietly unveiling new plans to build a Foxwoods-style casino in the New Bedford area.
But first, the tribe will have to persuade a skeptical Legislature.
"We've seen this dance before," said Sen. Mark Montigny, a New Bedford Democrat who championed the casino effort last time around. "They wasted a lot of time and energy in Massachusetts before, particularly on the south coast."
This time, however, some things are different: The Wampanoag have assembled a much stronger team, including top legal, accounting and lobbying firms. They can also point to the continued success of Connecticut's two Indian casinos, Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun.
And although there was little political clout to get the job done before, there clearly is interest in gambling among Bay State residents. Massachusetts residents spend close to $900 million a year on gambling, mostly at the two casinos, as well as slot machines in Rhode Island.
Secret talks go public
The Aquinnah Wampanoag of Martha's Vineyard received federal recognition in 1987. The tribe subsequently sought to open a gambling operation in Southeastern Massachusetts.
In 1997, the House overwhelmingly voted against a bill for a land-based Aquinnah Wampanoag casino in Fall River.
Tribal members then pushed a $25 million high-stakes bingo hall at the former municipal airport in Fall River. However, Fall River residents did not support a referendum allowing the proposal to go forward.
This most recent attempt apparently began with the tribe quietly getting a development team in place and beginning the search for an appropriate casino site.
Beverly M. Wright, chairwoman of the tribal council, said yesterday they have "begun engaging in a dialogue" with the state Legislature, acting Gov. Jane Swift, and local officials about the "feasibility of establishing a gaming and entertainment facility in Southeastern Massachusetts."
The tribe, which has yet to submit a formal application, will need approval from the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs to take the land into trust. The specific location has not been finalized.
Any gaming compact also would need approval from the Legislature, Attorney General Thomas Reilly confirmed yesterday.
The tribe has changed development partners since the last failure, dropping Carnival Hotels and Casinos and teaming up with the Tunica-Biloxi Indian Tribe, which owns the Paragon Casino in central Louisiana.
They've hired William Coyne, a longtime lobbyist whose clients in recent years have included Philip Morris, Bell Atlantic and Raytheon. The tribe has retained the Boston law firm Nutter, McClennen Fish for legal advice, and they've hired Deloitte Touche, an accounting firm, to study the impact of the proposed casino.
The rest of the team includes a national engineering firm, a casino architect and Chlopak Leonard Schechter and Associates, a public relations firm with offices in New York and Washington.
Finneran worries about impact
But the tribe will still have to overcome opposition to casinos.
"As I have said in the past, my concern on the question of gambling is protecting the revenue stream provided by the state Lottery," House Speaker Thomas Finneran said in a written statement. "The 351 cities and towns of the Commonwealth are highly dependent on this revenue."
Finneran said that could change if casinos open in New Hampshire and other surrounding states.
"If in the future, the Commonwealth finds itself surrounded by casinos on our borders, the members may want to revisit policy options," he said.
Swift left the door open to casino gambling, as did Senate President Thomas Birmingham. But both warned it would have to be weighed against any negatives.
"In general, she's not opposed (to casino gambling), but it does come down to the details," spokesman Jason Kauppi said. "The governor would want to look at where they would propose putting a casino, its impact on the region, and its impact on the municipalit what the state stands to gain and lose as a result. She's not actively pushing for a casino in the state."
Many legislators remain opposed to casinos, including state Rep. Eric Turkington, D-Falmouth, who represents the islands and part of the Cape.
"It was rather definitively settled four years ago, and I haven't seen any change," Turkington said. "If it's casino gambling in Massachusetts, I'm not supportive."
State Sen. James Jajuga, a Methuen Democrat who is a leading supporter of casino gambling, said more legislators are questioning why the state is losing millions of dollars to Connecticut. The proposed casino in Southeastern Massachusetts could reportedly generate $300 million a year for the state.
"A lot of people up here are saying, 'Why are we losing money to Connecticut? Why don't we keep it here in Massachusetts?'" Jajuga said.
There may be less interest for casinos in New Bedford now than there was in 1997, before the city reversed a decades-long downturn. Boarded-up buildings are being transformed into art galleries, shops and UMass classrooms. The region also is awaiting a commuter rail link and enhanced ferry service.
"We'll keep an open mind," Montigny said. "(The casino) may go nowhere. Certainly, New Bedford will survive just fine without it. If it fits into our economic development plans, we'll give it a serious look."
Jon Chesto of the Times Boston bureau contributed to this report.