Rep. Rogers Fighting for Walpole, Norwood to Have Say in Casino Project

John Rogers, State Representative for Norwood and Walpole, recently sent a letter to the Norwood Board of Selectmen outlining some of his efforts regarding the proposed Foxborough casino project and what, if any, say these two towns would have in such an undertaking.

On February 13, Rep. Rogers sent a letter to the Chairman of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission requesting that neighboring Walpole be given the legal status of "Host Community" in the issue of the proposed Foxborough casino. The title would grant the voters of Walpole the power to vote on any casino project in addition to the voters of Foxborough.

"The proposed site, distantly situated within the border of Foxborough, directly abuts more than 500 residential homes…all of which are Walpole families," Rogers states in the letter.

If the status is granted, it would give Norwood the legal status of "surrounding community," requiring the proponents of the project to negotiate with the town on the development of the casino project.

If the request is approved, it would mean a larger population voting on the casino project, and a much bigger say for the town of Norwood - which at the moment has essentially no say.

Gaming Commission Chair Stephen Crosby told the State House News Service he wasn’t sure how the commission would handle the request.

The following is the text of the letter from Rep. Rogers to the Norwood Board of Selectmen regarding his request and what it would mean for the town:

Dear Mr. Chairman and Honorable Members of the Board of Selectmen:

I have submitted a letter to the new state Gaming Commission requesting that the town of Walpole be deemed a “host community” under the Foxborough casino proposal, which consequently would by law confer upon the town of Norwood the legal status of a “surrounding community” (See attached letter and related article).    

Pursuant to Chapter 23K, §15 (9), the proponent, Mr. Steve Wynn, is required to negotiate with surrounding communities and submit a signed agreement to the gaming commission setting forth stipulations of known impacts on such towns from the development and operation of the proposal.  The agreement with the town must include a “community impact fee”, as well. 

While Norwood will see none of the benefits of hosting a casino, the public services of the town will nonetheless be severely impacted.  A casino on Route 1 will bring increased cost in public safety necessary to combat the inevitable increase in traffic and crime.

Further, the cannibalization effect from the casino has a 30-mile radius, placing Norwood effectively at its epicenter.  Experience in communities across the country has invariably demonstrated that patrons traveling to non-rural casinos do not spend money outside of the gaming establishment.  The new heavy traffic patterns deter usual area patrons to other locations outside of town, choking off business to existing establishments.  History shows that the only guaranteed survivors will be our gas stations.

Since this casino complex is all-inclusive, it will provide its patrons every need for food, alcohol, retail, entertainment, accommodations and banking.  The learned study on costs and benefits of casinos by Earl L. Grinois, found that for every $1,000 in increased casino revenue, similar businesses within 30 miles lost $234.  This casino would be the worst thing that could happen to the necessary economic and cultural revival of our venerated downtown, so rich in our history and so essential to the future of our Norwood families. 

For your continued and invaluable leadership for the people of Norwood, I remain

Gratefully Yours,

John H. Rogers