Plymouth Horse Racing Bill Goes To Committee
Follows Fall Town Meeting’s Home Rule Petition Article; Would Raise Hurdles For Racing in Plymouth
[ Readers, this is another article that I believe of essential public interest, and it is therefore free of charge. If you would like to support this publication, and are in a position to do so, please consider a paid subscription via the “subscribe” buttons in the text and at the end of the piece; if you wish to leave a tip, you may do so here.
If you have already done so, I deeply appreciate your generosity. In a very real way, paid subscribers keep the entire operation afloat, so I cannot thank them deeply enough. I likewise recognize, and am grateful for, their patience in terms of some new subscriber-only material. — Ed. ]
(BOSTON) — A bill (H. 374) that would make it more difficult to establish a horse racing track in Plymouth has advanced on Beacon Hill, where it will be considered in a hearing (both virtual and in-person) of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure on Thursday, April 20th, starting at 1 p.m.
Those who are interested in doing so may submit testimony regarding the bill here. I have provided my own testimony in the footnote below.1
( At a standout opposing the horse racing proposal, Spring, 2022; photo credit — J. Benjamin Cronin. )
Holmes’ Home Rule Petition Article
The bill, brought by Rep. Matthew J. Muratore (R-Plymouth) and Sen. Susan L. Moran (D-Falmouth), follows a Home Rule Petition Article that was passed by the Fall Plymouth Town Meeting, on October 15th, 2022. That Article was brought forward by Precinct 9 Town Meeting Member Kathryn M. Holmes, who has been outspoken in her opposition to horse racing.
“At last fall's town meeting, I submitted an Article for a Home Rule petition regarding Horse Racing with the great support of many residents in Plymouth,” said Ms. Holmes, on Friday, April 14th, on the No Horse Track-Save Plymouth Facebook page.
“It passed at Town Meeting and was submitted by Representative Muratore. However, the bill did not make it in the last session and was re-filed in January. I was just notified that a hearing is scheduled for this coming Thursday. I would greatly appreciate anyone who shares my passion to keep horseracing out of Plymouth to submit a letter by Thursday (instructions below) OR you can testify,” said Ms. Holmes.
According to my (non-lawyer’s) understanding, a home rule petition comes when a Town Meeting (or a City or Town Council) wishes to take an action that is beyond its powers; a Town’s bylaw may not intrude on the sphere of the Commonwealth; state law preempts Town laws where they conflict, and a Town may not pass legislation that is repugnant to the constitution.
The bill began life as Article 22 of the Fall Town Meeting, a citizens’ petition that came in response to the attempt by Boston South Real Estate Group, a cutout corporation for the O’Connell family of Quincy developers, to put a race track/casino on the County Wood Lot, a parcel owned by Plymouth County Government (in New England, county government has so little responsibility or purpose that it has been abolished as a governing body in the following Massachusetts counties: Berkshire, Franklin, Hampshire, Hampden, Worcester, Middlesex, Essex, and Suffolk).
The Article having passed the Plymouth Town Meeting, the local legislators, Sen. Moran and Rep. Muratore, brought it forward as H. 374 in the Massachusetts Legislature (formally, The General Court).
Background: The Plymouth Horse Racing Controversy of Spring, 2022
( The parcel in question; photo credit — from Boston South LLC’s proposal. )
Horse racing and gambling interests have been attempting to saddle a number of Towns with these horse track/casinos; locally, in Wareham in the spring of 2021, just one year prior and one town next door to the 2022 issue in Plymouth, the O’Connells’ prior cutout corporation, Notos, were defeated by an approximately 85% to 15% margin at the 2021 Annual Town Meeting for their remarkably similar proposal, which was to be sited in a globally rare and environmentally sensitive parcel, and was decisively rejected by the Town of Wareham.
The road for Boston South in Plymouth was in significant part opened by a March 29, 2022, vote of the Plymouth Select Board, when the Board (then-Chair and present Vice Chair Richard Quintal, then-Vice Chair and present Chair Betty Cavacco, and Charles Bletzer voted in favor; Selectmen Harry Helm and Patrick Flaherty voted against) voted to write a letter that further opened the door to Boston South’s efforts; the Select Board is the controlling authority on horse racing in a given town under Massachusetts law.
The Select Board’s minutes, recorded by Christopher Badot, administrative assistant to the Select Board, described the vote thus:
“On a motion by Betty Cavacco and seconded by Charlie Bletzer, the Board voted to express support for the conceptual project of a sports and entertainment complex and service amenities in the Town of Plymouth to be located on approximately 110 acres of land on Camelot Drive and Long Pond Road also known as the woodlot subject to the project proponent obtaining all of the necessary licenses, permits, and approvals, and maintaining compliance with all of the applicable statutes, codes, regulations, and bylaws.”
Selectman Quintal is running for reelection in the May 20, 2023, Town Election;2 Selectwoman Cavacco chose not to run for a third term.
The Plymouth County Commissioners met the evening of March 31st, 2022, in their offices on Obery Street in Plymouth, where, after refusing to take any public comment from the numerous assembled citizens — and constituents — they voted in favor of exploring the prospect of a lease with Boston South, LLC, prompting shouts of “shame!” from the public.
( The Plymouth County Commissioners’ March 31, 2022, meeting. At right, Attorney and Town Meeting Member Richard Serkey waits patiently to be recognized by the then Chair, Commissioner Wright, who refused public comment. Photo credit — J. Benjamin Cronin)
That Saturday, April 2nd, 2022, at the Plymouth Annual Town Meeting, then- Select Board Chair Richard B. Quintal, Jr., said the following:
“This coming year the [Select] Board will have a major focus on economic development. As many of you may already know, the County has received an RFP [Request For Proposal] response for a thoroughbred race track, sports betting complex, minor baseball team, international soccer team, conference center, venue, and two hotels,” said Selectman Quintal.
“Although this is still in infancy stage, discussions with the County, state delegation, and our department heads are well underway. I have been working on this project for the last six months with our elected and appointed officials, which has projected new growth of near $500 million,” Selectman Quintal said.
Despite an expensive public campaign undertaken by the O’Connells and their business partners, such as Vince Gabbert, a Kentucky horse and gambling attorney, Boston South and their local agents failed badly at the Plymouth Spring Town Elections on May 21st, 2022, at which, in a non-binding ballot question that was put before the electorate, 88% voted against a casino/racetrack, and just 12% in favor.
Subsequent to that, a new Select Board was seated, with Mr. Bletzer having been returned to office, and John Mahoney having been elected to fill the seat that was vacated by Mr. Flaherty. That Select Board decided to follow the lead of Selectmen Helm and Flaherty, with Mr. Quintal, Ms. Cavacco, and Mr. Bletzer joining Mr. Helm and Mr. Mahoney in voting unanimously to express the Select Board’s strong opposition to a horse track/casino in Plymouth in a June, 2022, letter.
The Select Board is the controlling authority on horse racing in a given Town under M.G.L. c. 128A.
Nevertheless, later that summer, in July, 2022, the Plymouth County Commission, in a brazen display of their contempt both for the expressed will of the People and the Select Board of the Town of Plymouth, voted to sign a lease with Boston South (Commissioners Jared Valanzola and Sandra Wright voted in the affirmative; Commissioner Gregory Hanley, a Plymouth resident, was absent). That lease was not for the three years the Town was led to believe was under consideration, but, via a clause allowing a 70 year renewal period, effectively gives control over the property to Boston South for 73 years from the date of signing, should they so desire.
Looking at H. 374
Article 22 from the Fall Town Meeting and H. 374 do have a few differences, but so far as I see — and again, I am not an attorney — those differences may well strengthen the powers of the Town with respect to limiting horse racing.
Let’s examine the bill.
Section 1 states that “the purpose of this legislation is to ensure that the citizens of Plymouth have the opportunity to decide whether horse racing shall be licensed in their town.”
Section 2 defines “horse racing,” and Section 3 specifies a number of conditions which must be met in order for any horse racing to occur in the Town; in other words, putting more obstacles in the way of Boston South and other putative horse racing developers. These conditions would have to be met before the application is submitted, or the Massachusetts Gaming Commission considering any location.
At Section 3(b)(1), the bill, perhaps taking cognizance of the rather sudden way in which the proposal came before the Town and the region last year, states that “the town shall publish notice of the proposed horse racing location at least 60 days prior to any public hearing on the proposed horse racing location.”
The bill likewise stipulates that “a public hearing on the proposed horse racing location shall be held in the town no less than 30 days before the next scheduled town meeting.” (§3(b)(2))
A majority of the Town’s registered voters must vote to approve of the proposed horse racing location, and the Town Meeting must also vote its assent (§3(b)(3-4)).
Finally, all of those four conditions must be satisfied in the same calendar year. Only then can the Select Board of Plymouth vote to approve the horse racing location in question. (§3(b)(5), §3(c)).
There has been no significant news of late from Plymouth County on the topic, beyond, as Bobbi Clark of WATD reports, the fact that the County Commissioners have recently resolved to crack down on ATV use on the Wood Lot. Last summer, Loring Tripp III, planning and development director for Boston South, attempted to woo the off road vehicle community with extravagant blandishments regarding ATV access when the lease was signed; as seems par for the course, those promises have not proven reliable.
My own testimony is appended below. The link to the hearing of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure will be held starting at 1 p.m. on Thursday, April 20th, 2023, is here; other bills will be considered, as well, so if you do wish to testify, be prepared for a bit of a wait.
I intend to write something like the following (Sen. Cronin is no relation of mine, I should note); readers may use similar arguments if they find them helpful:
April 18, 2023
The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure
Senator John J. Cronin, Chair
Rep. Tackey Chan, Chair
24 Beacon Street
Boston, MA 02133
Dear Sen. Cronin and Rep. Chan:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I write to you with testimony supporting a bill before your committee, H. 374, An Act concerning horse racing within the town of Plymouth.
The bill, from Rep. Muratore and Sen. Moran, comes following a vote at the The Plymouth Town Meeting in October, 2022, passing a home rule petition Article that would make it more difficult to open a licensed horse track in the town. H. 374 advances these same purposes.
One of the chief objections of the people of Plymouth and her neighboring Towns to the casino/horse track proposal last year was precisely how little actual support it had, and how palpably little respect its proponents had for our local democracies; indeed, when the question was put to the electorate at the May Town elections, 88% opposed a casino/race track, with only 12% supporting one. The voice of the people is clear: they do not want to see this in Plymouth, and H. 374 legitimately enacts the expressed popular will, as is appropriate and necessary in a democracy.
The bill likewise provides for a reasonable period of public warning and notification should any such proposal come before the Town. One of the strong objections of opponents to a horse track in Plymouth was the seemingly, and one might argue actually, surreptitious way it was entered into the official conversation, both at the level of the Town and the County of Plymouth, which owns the parcel that was and is in question.
Because the bill gives the people of Plymouth a greater say over a matter of great importance to the Town, I would respectfully urge the Hon. Members to support H. 374 and report it favorably out of this committee.
Sincerely,
J. Benjamin Cronin, Ph.D
Duxbury, MA
I contacted Mr. Quintal’s campaign account on Facebook on March 13th; I have not heard back.
Thank you Ben!