January 29, 2010 -- Sort of an odd foretelling of the current situation as reported in the papers. Very odd how the writing was so clearly on the wall, but those in power and those representing them could not see the forest for the trees.
"The deal with Middleboro is contingent on the land being taken into federal trust and the high court's decision puts that arrangement in peril, said Adam Bond, a former Middleboro selectman who helped negotiate the contract. If the Supreme Court ruling stands, it may qualify as an "impossibility of performance" and give the tribe leverage to walk away from the deal, Bond said.
It's leverage that Bond has been urging selectmen to use for months to sweeten the town's deal with the tribe. One of the areas the board could have targeted is easing the $250 million infrastructure improvements, he said. "The tribe has done all its negotiating with everyone else," Bond said. "The board of selectmen has done no negotiating."
But Dennis Whittlesey, the Washington-based attorney who specializes in Indian gaming law and was hired by Middleboro to craft the deal, said the pact is still binding, despite the court decision.
"The town does have a valid and enforceable agreement with the tribe," Whittlesey said yesterday. "If the tribe chooses to go somewhere else, then the town would have to consider its options under the agreement."
Middleboro town leaders did not return requests for comment yesterday.
"All of their assurances of being partners to the town are ringing pretty hollow right now," said Mark Belanger, a Middleboro resident and staunch casino critic.
What Belanger calls a rushed agreement between the town and the tribe set off years of bickering between pro- and anti-casino factions."
Monday, May 17, 2010
Lost Opportunities
The BOS has really shown how the failure to act on opportunities during the course of a deal will cause that deal to crash and burn. As Mimi advocated, we cannot kick our "neighbors" when they are down. That is true.. but does not apply to business, and the deal with the Tribe was business. The BOS forgot that and, at least figuratively, nobody ever returned the blanket.
The attitude of Al Rullo and Marsha Brunelle that we have to wait and do nothing rather than push and enforce the agreement at every step has led to the BOS relieving us of any realistic opportunity of getting something out of the Tribe.
The time to start pushing was back when the Glenn Marshall issues came up. Then when Shawn Hendricks removed us from the mix in his letter to the Governor. Then there was the opportunity to demand a meeting with the Tribe under the Dispute Resolution provision (p. 16 of 21 of the IGA). That provision would have gotten us to the table with the Tribe within 10 days of the notice being issued -- as opposed to the 6 months this garbage with the Tribe has continued.
Well, if you ever need a group of people that can kill all possible opportunities in a deal through inaction and sloth, call the Middleborough BOS. Nice job guys and gals. Way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Anyone consider a suit against Fall River for tortious interference with known contractual relations? Just a thought which will probably also be overlooked.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Dissed Again! First Marc...Now Cedric
As was reported by the Enterprise:
Cedric Cromwell, chairman of the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe, released a statement saying, “Once gaming is expanded, we intend to move forward with our plans to build a full resort-style casino in Southeastern Massachusetts under the rights afforded to us as a sovereign Indian tribe.’’
Are we invisible, or just chopped liver. All of our "friends" and "neighbors" seem to be looking straight through us in Middleborough. Marc Pacheco abandoned us for his racetrack agenda, and -- from what I can tell -- intentionally did not mention Middleborough specifically as a casino site in his legislation (both initial and to be corrected). Thanks Marc.. will be voting for you real soon.
Now, our great friends and saviors, the Mashpee Wampanoag, those beacons of forthrightness and eptitude, are also forgetting that Middleborough is where they signed an IGA to put a casino. Are we the ugly step sibling that nobody wants to say by name, even our betrothed, the Mashpee. Are we the date that puts out on a drunken night that the Mashpee just don't want to call the next day?
Cedric, can you say Middleborough...I bet you can. But you just don't actually say it when it counts...like when asked about your plans to build a resort casino. We are in Southeastern Massachusetts, so I can't fault you for that. Your geography is incredible, but pleeease tell me that you just had a senior moment and couldn't remember the word "Middleborough," like Shawn forgot it when writing to the Governor.
Folks, the Tribe has just answered the letter that the Town sent the Tribe to say "do we still have a deal?" The answer is, sure, unless I find a better looking, richer date in the meantime. We are being told to take the casino development money left on the bedside table, and be happy that we got some dinner first. The antis did say that gambling would increase prostitution--just look at what the Tribe is doing to Middleborough without any pushback from the BoS.
Middleborough Board of Selectmen...do you feel used yet? Are you mad yet? Do something to wipe some of the egg off the face.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
What was the point?
People have questioned the point of the plow gate suit, and certainly questioned my motives. As to the latter, think what you want about me, the results speak for themselves. As to the former, I will try to explain.
The "subject" of the suit was the plowing of the 15 private/unaccepted ways, and certainly is less important than the point. Much as the special 15 (and even the Select 5) think it was all about them, it wasn't. The point was that the people still own the government--its not the other way around.
The Town officials serve at the whim of the people, not only at election time, but also throughout their term. The people always have recourse for the improper or illegal actions of our public servants, and you can beat City Hall.
The point is that we the people own the seats (a la Scott Brown), and we only lose that ownership if we succumb to a lachrymose view of political history. We only suffer under the government yoke when we accept the choice of fear or inaction.
Here, a small group of citizens that had a point to make, made it -- for better or for worse. A Superior Court and an Appeals Court saw it the same way -- government officials are as subject to the laws as the rest of us huddled and unwashed masses. They actually can be forced to comply with the same standards that bind the rest of us.
Said more directly, government serves us, and at any time we can retake the reigns through concerted and focused action, through the polls, through commentary, and, if the circumstance warrants, even litigation. In Middleborough, contrary to popular belief, the Selectmen are not the all and powerful OZ, and we should stop treating them that way. Call them on their actions (or inactions) when they are wrong.
You may not like the cases when they are brought. However, the last two cases have shown that: (1) our BoS acts unconstitutionally in its "hearing procedures" (the dog appeal)and still refuses to adopt any; and (2) that the BoS has no right to simply and willfully disregard the law (plowgate).
So contrary to the BoS publicly stated view by its current Chairman, Selectman Brunelle, and Selectman Duphily, that the plow suit plaintiffs were mean-spirited, shameful, and not attuned to the Middleborough way, I note that two Courts have said otherwise. As to the "Middleborough Way" comment,the many life-time citizens on the suit (including the several veterans on the suit that served to protect our political freedoms) certainly contest such a statement, and would remind the Board that we live in America, and it always will be the American way.
The "subject" of the suit was the plowing of the 15 private/unaccepted ways, and certainly is less important than the point. Much as the special 15 (and even the Select 5) think it was all about them, it wasn't. The point was that the people still own the government--its not the other way around.
The Town officials serve at the whim of the people, not only at election time, but also throughout their term. The people always have recourse for the improper or illegal actions of our public servants, and you can beat City Hall.
The point is that we the people own the seats (a la Scott Brown), and we only lose that ownership if we succumb to a lachrymose view of political history. We only suffer under the government yoke when we accept the choice of fear or inaction.
Here, a small group of citizens that had a point to make, made it -- for better or for worse. A Superior Court and an Appeals Court saw it the same way -- government officials are as subject to the laws as the rest of us huddled and unwashed masses. They actually can be forced to comply with the same standards that bind the rest of us.
Said more directly, government serves us, and at any time we can retake the reigns through concerted and focused action, through the polls, through commentary, and, if the circumstance warrants, even litigation. In Middleborough, contrary to popular belief, the Selectmen are not the all and powerful OZ, and we should stop treating them that way. Call them on their actions (or inactions) when they are wrong.
You may not like the cases when they are brought. However, the last two cases have shown that: (1) our BoS acts unconstitutionally in its "hearing procedures" (the dog appeal)and still refuses to adopt any; and (2) that the BoS has no right to simply and willfully disregard the law (plowgate).
So contrary to the BoS publicly stated view by its current Chairman, Selectman Brunelle, and Selectman Duphily, that the plow suit plaintiffs were mean-spirited, shameful, and not attuned to the Middleborough way, I note that two Courts have said otherwise. As to the "Middleborough Way" comment,the many life-time citizens on the suit (including the several veterans on the suit that served to protect our political freedoms) certainly contest such a statement, and would remind the Board that we live in America, and it always will be the American way.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Knives in the Back!!!
It seems that Senator Pacheco is taking great issue with the Enterprise saying that his bill puts the casino out of Middleborough -- even though he represents Middleborough. I'm not sure what the flak is all about. His bill states that the Tribe will get a preference in Bristol County Market, and the bill he and State Rep Canessa and State Rep Calter--also two who are supposed to represent Middleborough--have sponsored even more clearly puts the casino in Bristol County, not Middleborough.
Marc apparently does not see the problem for Middleborough with the bill, and adamantly insists that he is not supporting the move of the casino out of Middleborough since putting it in Fall River wouldn't even put it in his district. But there is some sense for Marc in this scenario--the one where Middleborough loses.
In my opinion, I see the following:
1. Both bills on which Marc has placed himself are anti casino in Middleborough. His bill accepts the possibility that the casino go somewhere other than Middleborough, and the bill he and Calter and Canessa sponsored expressly puts the casino out of Middleborough. In fact, if he and Canessa actually had any respect for the Middleborough contract, the only preference that would be placed in the bill for the Tribe would be exactly where the deal in the IGA puts it--Middleborough. Marc and Steve have screwed Middleborough with the legislation, because that legislation creates a possible reward for the Tribe in leaving Middleborough, but staying in the region.
2. Why would Marc do this in an election cycle. Just look at where a number of his contributions come from and his loyalty to the race track. Move the Tribe out of Middleborough and protect Raynham. This is a move that makes a lot of sense, and would probably be good for BOTH the track and Middleborough under the right circumstances, but to continue to play like you are representing the interests of Middleborough, when the facts show that that is clearly not the case, is disingenuous at best.
As to the Tribe, where are they in telling Middleborough what they are doing. How can they just let the know nothing, do nothing BOS just sit in a round room looking for a corner. I am of the firm conclusion that they are using Middleborough as leverage and will drop Middleborough at the first sign of a better and cheaper deal. The problem is that the Tribal leadership is getting ready to give up their most prized possession -- their sovereignty -- to get a casino. Bad for the Tribal members, and a stupid play for a short term gain.
As to the BOS, they suddenly have been given an opportunity (again) to take hold of the situation and get some payout for the Town with their new found leverage, but they are stuck in neutral. This set back poses at least 3 different negotiation opportunities with both the Tribe and the State, where we could probably get significant money out of one or the other WITHOUT ever having to host the casino in our Town. Think about that...money without impacts. That would satisfy both the pros and the antis, and would be a very nice conclusion to this perpetual soap opera. But, alas, our BOS has no creativity or acumen for finding the leverage points in these most recent, and seemingly negative, developments. Think hard BOS and you will discover that the way things are playing out, we have the power to get out of this whole problem with a flow of money in our pockets and a Town that stays just as it is--the best of all worlds. Or don't think at all and watch Middleborough get it in the back from Marc, Steve, and the Tribe. Tom has been up front on his position, so I have no beef with him.
Finally, it has become absolutely clear to me that no casino in Middleborough would probably be the safest result, since, as I have said before, the leaders of this Town are not capable to handle the 800 pound gorilla in the room. They certainly have no control over Marc Pacheco, and certainly do not command the respect or loyalty of Steve Canessa. If they did, neither Steve nor Marc would have the nerve to so disrespect the Town's contract with the Tribe by tortiously interfering with a known contractual relationship. If we can't get our own to respect us, then why do we expect the Tribe to respect us.
Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder
If this saying is true, then the "cheap seats" Selectman should have no problem getting back into office. Not surprisingly, SS was absent at least 20 times in his last term, an late at least 11 times. Mr. Frawley, also running for the seat, has been at more meetings in the last two years and has a better attendance record than Steve "Cheap Seats" Spataro, and he isn't even a Selectman.
Which of the two would be up to date on the issues? Which of the two would have listened to all the debate and done the research? Mr. Frawley.
The cheap seats are apparently really valuable to Mr. Frawley as he makes sure at least one is kept warm and polished each week with his butt. If you have watched him, he also brings his brain.
I may not agree with every position he has, but he spots problems and offers solutions. He speaks his mind respectfully and professionally. He comes ready to debate the issues, and he is engaged. Sure would be an interesting change of pace, and while familiarity breeds contempt, familiarity is also the result of actually showing up to meeting and showing up on time and prepared. By the way, I don't think he would sit and text message during the meetings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
