.

Where Do You Stand on Foxborough Casino?

Take our poll and let us know how you feel at this point about the casino plan for Foxborough.

 

Both the groups for and against Steve Wynn's plan to build a casino in Foxborough have been getting their information out to residents in recent weeks.

With everything you have heard up until the point, where do you stand on whether to allow the casino to be built on Route 1? Tell us in our poll and in the comment section.

Our poll is non-scientific. Please vote once. You have until Wednesday to cast your poll and state your opinion in the comment section.

Michael Chang March 12, 2012 at 02:50 PM
This is ridiculous, I noticed these polls jumping up so I took a few print screens. I can email them to anyone if they want to see it. At 10:41 the Im against the Wynn Casino was at 149 votes, not at 10:49 this poll jumped up to a whopping 370 votes in a the very short time of 8 minutes. Dont believe these polls.
Foxboro Born March 12, 2012 at 02:54 PM
Let Kraft build something less controversial and more productive for that area, such as the Science Park.
Janet Sroczynski March 12, 2012 at 02:59 PM
I also took the poll @Michael Chang, and it was about...oh, I'd say 45-minutes or so ago that I took the poll. And back then, it was only at about 32 votes. So yes, I am glad you pointed out the significant increase in votes. Currently at 563. This poll and the votes are not binding, nor are they accurate. Someone is obviously voting more than once. And in "bulk voting" -too I might add. Ridiculous.
Christine March 12, 2012 at 03:07 PM
LOL...A co-worker of mine who lives in Pepperell just received an email from their friend in Walpole with a link to the Patch asking him to vote "against" and to please forward to all their friends.
JAS March 12, 2012 at 03:22 PM
Hmmmm Yeahhhh I dont trust this poll at all
Chris A March 12, 2012 at 03:39 PM
I just cleared my browser cache and was able to vote twice. I have more confidence in a pleasant experience at the Registry of Motor Vehicles than this poll.
Buck Farack March 12, 2012 at 04:43 PM
Michael, the jump in votes seems to coincide with the time that No Fox Vegas posted the poll on their page. They have 800+ members, plus 400+ on Say No and 60 or so on the Neighbors United Page. I'm sure there's a ton of overlap on those pages but they got the message out. I'm also sure everyone on both sides is getting the message out to everyone they know. Those things should equal each other out, but it's not a scientific poll anyway.
Michael Chang March 12, 2012 at 05:19 PM
This poll was not posted on the No Fox-Vegas page, nor on the Say no, or the Neighbors United Pate . And I still find it hard to believe that a post could jump over 250 votes in a matter of 8 minutes.
Dave March 12, 2012 at 05:34 PM
Um, yes the poll was posted on all those pages. Kind of reminds me of the dueling petitions, 1900 against 66 for?
Buck Farack March 12, 2012 at 06:33 PM
Michael, it was posted on No Fox-Vegas right around 10:30.
Donna Richardson March 13, 2012 at 12:12 PM
I voted three time yesterday and just voted again.....if this was a "real" representation of the people there should have been only one vote per person allowed ! ! !
Deborah A Stewart March 13, 2012 at 03:35 PM
The bottom line is that a sizable portion of the local population DOES want a casino. For that very reason, Foxborough should be given opportunity to speak for itself at the ballot box! Rather than one group attempting to speak for us all ....
Foxboro Born March 13, 2012 at 04:49 PM
Most people don't want it. And most of the local population doesn't even have a say one way or the other.
Chris A March 13, 2012 at 04:54 PM
If you're pro-information for the casino then the best we can do as Foxboro residents is to start by supporting Larry Harrington & Martha Slattery in the upcoming selectmen election. Get organized now.
Buck Farack March 13, 2012 at 05:18 PM
I see discussion here about the pro side, the anti side, how the poll is being manipulated... vast silent majorities, people wanting more information, out of towners voting against, etc. There's one result of this poll that has not been maniuplated and that's the "I'm still undecided" option which is coming in at a whopping 34 votes or 3% of the total. 34 votes for undecided? Really?? Is someone deleting their votes maybe? I though there was this great mass of people who hadn't made up their minds, who needed more information to make an educated decision. Doesn't look like a whole lot of them now, does it? Anyone taking the time to post here has already made up their mind, there's nothing Wynn is going to say to the pro information crowd that's going to turn them against a casino. It's fine if you're for a casino but don't be disingenuous and say you need more information to make up your mind, no one is buying it. Everyone knows where they stand on it (except maybe 34 people). The reason people claim to be "pro information" and haven't made up their minds yet is because they're trying to move the process forward, they don't want information they want the town to enter official negotioations. Wynn can submit a proposal any time he wants and Town Counsel gave good reasons why the Town shouldn't entertain an official proposal unless they're willing to begin negotiations.
Foxboro Born March 13, 2012 at 05:43 PM
Even if you are pro-casino, I would not vote for Larry Harrington. He has shown in the past his loyalty lies with Kraft, not the town of Foxboro. We need people who will negotiate for the town and get us the best deal. Not someone who has secret meetings with Kraft.
Chris A March 13, 2012 at 06:27 PM
Buck, There would be lots of details needed to be ironed out. For example, they should consider a satellite police station. It may surprise you but I might vote against because Foxboro police come flying up 140 and North St on a daily basis for incidents on Rte. 1. It's gotten worse since Patriot Place took off in popularity but nothing they can't solve. They already need one in my opinion just because of the increased traffic and people at Patriot Place. Are there any traffic pattern changes to help with any congestion? Would this help Foxboro with the water/sewer and utility issues? What about the parking garage on game days? More details on the security and costs overruns. Lots of missing details.
Foxboro Born March 13, 2012 at 06:37 PM
I think if there were a solution to the traffic problems on Route One, they would have fixed it long ago. Certainly when they built the new stadium.
Chris A March 13, 2012 at 06:45 PM
I personally think they should have some type of HOV lane ramps starting near the End Zone hotel and the McDonalds or Red Wings areas to filter the traffic from passing through traffic. They sort of do this near the Christmas Tree Shop area. It really depends how big this thing is. It's unclear just by the drawing how big we're talking about. Whatever they eventually build there will increase traffic....ain't no question about that. At least this could possibly help pay for band-aid traffic fixes.
Buck Farack March 13, 2012 at 07:05 PM
Chris, I think you're missing my point. You're already talking about details needing to be ironed out; according to the Gambling Legislation that would mean that host comminity negotiations have begun. There's an enormous leap from "getting more information" to entering host community negotiations. No one is stopping Wynn from making a formal proposal available, he can do it at Gillette and invite anyone who wants to come and see it, he can mail it to anyone he likes and post it online as he has already done with the conceptual renderings he sent out last week. On the other hand, if the town accepts an official proposal it actually gets the ball rolling on a formal approval or rejection process which opens them up to legal action if they decide against the proposal. That's what Town Counsel said at the BOS meeting after reading the legislation. It's the proverbial foot in the door which can end up being a long, drawn out affair and ends with a town vote even if the BOS is against it going to a town vote. Now, for those saying it should definitely go to a town vote that might be fine but for those saying "what's the harm in hearing a proposal", allowing Wynn to make a formal proposal to the BOS opens up a can of worms. The legislation was written such that the BOS has full authority and responsibility to decide whether they wish to enter host community negotiations. They have said they don't want to. That may not sit well with many but the law is the law.
Buck Farack March 13, 2012 at 07:16 PM
Cont. When people say that there's no harm hearing a proposal, there actually is. If it was just a matter that they show up before the BOS one day and say "here's our proposal, thank you very much for considering it" I don't think anyone on the BOS would object. Unfortunately, that's not the way it works according to what I have read and what Town Counsel said at the BOS meeting. Also, if a proponent is not happy with a rejection they can and often do take legal action. Let's say, after hearing all the information and discussing mitigation the BOS decides against bringing it to a town vote, the proponent could say why did you reject it? If they're not satisfied with the reason for rejection they could appeal it in the courts, drag things on, rebut and counter studies, expert opinions, say they have offered adequate mitigation. This could spill over to new boards. Yes the proponent pays all the costs incurred but it can drag on for a long time. This is not about getting more information, it's about beginning the negotiating process which is a whole other matter.
Chris A March 13, 2012 at 07:27 PM
Until an application is submitted and the BOS vote on something real...doesn't mean jack. My guess is they won't submit an application until after the selectmen race. That's why I will be supporting the two selectmen who are at least willing to hear it out and keep the ball rolling to let the people have more say. Should the people reject it after that I have no problem with that.
Buck Farack March 13, 2012 at 07:58 PM
Chris, I agree with you that unless the BOS votes on something real it doesn't mean jack... I think that's precisely what the BOS is trying to avoid. Wynn is trying to use the "more info" argument to get them to accept the application and get the ball rolling because once he gets his foot in the door it becomes very hard for the BOS to reject it. He knows he'll be able to advertise the hell out of this thing and have a reasonable chance at a vote going his way (although I don't ever see him getting a 2/3 majority vote to change the bylaw). I don't see why he doesn't just offer a public proposal, if it's that good and the people want it they'll pressure the BOS to take an official look at it. Actually, I'd be surprised if he doesn't do that before the election anyway. I agree completely with you about the election except that if Brue & Coppola are elected I do not believe Wynn can submit an application without BOS approval given the current town bylaw prohibiting gambling. I'd be amazed if Harrington & Slattery didn't get completely trounced but if they win then and they decide to move forward so be it.
Chris A March 13, 2012 at 08:08 PM
I do agree Buck. Depending how the selectmen election went, the 2/3 majority to change the bylaw would be a major hurdle. Perhaps the hardest part.
JM55 March 26, 2012 at 04:49 PM
Don't you get it these polls are all rigged in favor of the house, just like in a casiNO! How do you like gambling now? Don’t worry about all of the propaganda, this is just the beginning. Just stick together and vote for what you believe is right!!!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »