by Tom Driscoll
8/4/2013
The signs are all over town here in Holliston. “Casi-no!” with emphasis on the “no!” Folks put them on their lawns as a show of emphatic non-support for the idea of a casino, not here in Holliston but in Milford, the next town over. I’ve not partaken of the lawn sign business myself on a couple of accounts. I actually don’t have a lawn first and foremost and if I did I’ve got to admit I’m just not all that dead set against them having whatever they decide they want in Milford. I’m no expert in the details, but as I understand it the Milford development as proposed is to be located on land just over the line from Holliston with fairly direct access to Route 495. Thusly it seems relatively well situated for what they nowadays call a “destination casino resort experience” or some such. Not my cup of tea personally, but to each his own.
What any town does on one side of the line is going to have some impact upon the town on the other, I understand that. But with the Milford site’s direct arterial connection to 495 one could imagine the impact on Holliston being minor, even beneficial with some prudent planning decisions. To talk to some of the folks who oppose the casino, though, you would think this one proposal is the camel’s back breaking straw that will see our little version of Bedford Falls (It’s a Wonderful Life) start upon its sad decline into Pottersville —flashing lights, gunfire and floozies flouting feather boas in the streets —dead gangster’s clogging our scenic lake in their cement overshoes.
The first time I ever encountered this fervent opposition I was sitting in a room of like minded liberals. The book club discussion had wound down and the topic came up. One of our participants was selling the lawn signs. I admitted to not sharing in the zeal and I quick found myself surrounded and being accused of uncaring disregard for the plight of compulsive gamblers, crime run rampant in the streets, etc. I pointed out this is a Foxwood’s Resort Casino we’re talking about, that my mom —not exactly a gun moll for the mob— used to ride the Senior Center chartered bus to Foxwoods in Connecticut with her friends. A good friend of mine had told me about catching some pretty good music acts there. I was lectured then at length on the corrosive social costs of gambling. I had to ask at that point if anybody was prepared to stand at Town Meeting and move that the town not accept any lottery money from the state. About then I was told the lighting of this casino was such that to support it, or even not oppose it avidly enough, was to evince a craven disregard for starlight.
It was about then I concluded that there was some plane the Casi-No! crowd was operating on that I simply couldn’t fathom or navigate. And I swam for shore.
Then I came across this piece in my favorite local online community news site,
There’s Nothing to Worry About: A Satire. The author waxes sarcastic at what he sees as the logical inconsistency in the traffic study and recent presentation of proposed roadway improvements involved in the casino proposal. That’s fine. I see some inconsistency in the logic of his critique just as well. Reasonable folks can disagree. But then came this little tidbit all wrapped up in the same swift sarcasm of the rest of this satire:
As for other impacts, frankly, they go under the heading of “None of Your Business.” Still, we can rest assured: our property values won’t go down, they’ll go up. Only a handful of employees’ kids will end up enrolling in grades K-12, and they’ll all speak the King’s English. Crime will actually go down, because there’ll be more police. And the project is quite modest in size, really. Tiny! You’ll hardly even know it’s there. According to the experts, all the bad stuff you might have heard about casinos, none of it is true. None of it.
I’d been seeking a concise retort to the lawn sign bumpersticker sentiment “Casi-
No!” ever since that night I wandered out into the gorgeous jilted starlight from our book club. And this author’s satire may have offered up the analogy I was looking for. If all this pseudo-civic umbrage really boils down to fretting over property values and the wrong kind of people maybe coming to live in town —and what’s worse expecting to see
their kids educated along side
ours —well, the obvious parallel is with the
Know Nothings of the 1850′s. They, too, had a mind for resenting outsiders and cloaking jealous spiteful bigotry in supposed high minded civic concern. Back then the scary immigrants were Irish and German Catholics, and the resonant political message was that these weren’t quite Americans showing up in our towns and cities to build things, they were maybe just a little foreign to our ways —to the King’s English, you might say. As one critic put it, the Know Nothings bespoke “the spirit which is forever carping about the foreign-born citizen and trying to abridge his privileges.”
“Casi-Know-Nothings” —that’s a lot to put on a lawn sign I suppose, maybe too subtle. Come to think of it, I don’t even have a lawn.
"Fredo, don't ever take sides against the family again."
LT | 2013-08-07 07:21:36
I have a right to my very reasonable fears of horrible traffic and water problems, and will continue to just say no, but thank goodness we have a Know Everything that is willing to let us know exactly what we were really thinking when we opposed the casino.
know something | 2013-08-06 17:31:52
You are very clear Mr. Driscoll, you obviously have an agenda in this casino thing. Your friend the Governor says I can't have more than 3 grams of salt on my food, nor a "soda pop" larger than 12 ounces, but I can walk from my house and piss away all my money. Maybe even get lucky with those type of woman that advertise the "casino specials on Craigslist. Your America and mine will never be the same. Those Papist Hordes you referred to came here because this was the place that was the best, I hope when you and your buddies that know what is best for me are done, it still is worth being here.
Scott Heavner | 2013-08-06 14:51:52
To be clear, I haven't said every person who opposes the Milford Casino is a racist. Not every Know Nothing actively resented "the papist hordes" back in the day. Some, I'm sure, were genuinely convinced that the American Republic they knew and loved as it then stood was was doomed, bound to change. And they were right. To borrow a phrase, they saw it their civic duty to stand astride history and holler 'stop!' I think that is an apt parallel for what's going on here. The Casino Development would mean change were it to come. Holliston doesn't like change. I can understand that. Change isn't always good. But, in my humble opinion I think a good amount of the dire predictions are overstated and a little less of the "just say 'no'" and "us versus them" would be really useful about now, a little less of the coming apocalypse, a little less fear and panic. When that fear gets trained upon the prospect "those people" who might work to build or operate the casino actually coming to live in our community that's an ugliness worth calling out and challenging. Sorry if that offended anybody, but not really.
Tom Driscoll | 2013-08-06 03:08:18
I commuted from Holliston to South Boston for 30 years and it was a piece of cake compared to maneuvering through Rte. 16 in Milford center - The traffic is the deal breaker, it would be Twilight Zone material - Unfortunately, some of the article's comments are pretty intense and personal, which is too bad - we all love Holliston, whether we have a lawn of not.
Lee DeSorgher | 2013-08-05 18:57:38
Mr Driscoll, You have a nerve, calling those opposed to the casino racists, my term not yours, but thats what I hear in your words. You talk about the Irish and German Catholics, not to mention the Italians of yesteryear. The difference that you fall to understand is those immigrants and others came hear to be Americans, and assimilated to this country and worked their butts off to succeed, and became the better part of our society. I for one and I am sure the author you quoted is more than willing to help out the needy family, but you know as well as all of us 47-52% of people at the "free money window" is far to many people to help. Yet you rant as though we are a bunch of haters. I for one am sick of being termed a racists for wanting what is good for my community. And finally I have a lawn, and it costs me almost a $1000.00 per month in taxes to have one, so lucky for you don't have one, but don't begrudge me for my lawn sign.
Scott Heavner | 2013-08-05 15:47:07
I am bemused by someone of Mr. Driscoll's political beliefs standing up for an industry comprised of big-money corporations whose entire business model is to take money from the most vulnerable members of our society. I remain opposed to Casino gambling in ANY community in Massachusetts, including Milford. Unfortunately, my "just saying NO" has no weight given the way the legislation was written, and I have no real voice in any "nuanced discussion"-should such discussion ever take place. But I reserve my right to my moral objections and to just say NO because really, that is all that is legally (if somewhat futilely) left to me. I resent Mr. Driscoll's reading of any bigotry into mine, or anyone else's', opposition to this plan.
Judy Grosjean | 2013-08-05 11:48:20
James, I appreciate your comment that the issues at hand are more complex than a simple "us versus them" situation. I heartily agree. I also think the question could benefit from a little more nuance than the Nancy Reaganesque 'Just Say No' that strikes me as the starting point for most any discussion of the Milford casino here in town. Protecting property value might be a good thing and it can and should be done by protecting the quality of life in a community. But when one aspect of that "quality" becomes who we manage to exclude I suggest that's a value worth questioning.
Tom Driscoll | 2013-08-05 09:26:52
People like Mr. Driscoll make me scared for the future of Holliston. A casino would ruin this town. Mr. Driscoll, have you been to CT? have you been to atlantic city? Go first hand and see the destruction that resort casinos have had on communities. It is NOT OKAY!
HRes | 2013-08-05 09:10:00
Maybe you haven't been paying attention... It is Foxwoods that made the statement that they will only hire English speaking individuals. I think David was only showing how outlandish all of the Foxwoods claims are. Foxwoods is saying that they will open a casino that generates no local traffic, that doesn't require any additional support from the Health Department, there's plenty of water available, that there will be only 21 new kids total at all of the area schools, there will be no increase with gambling problems in the area, no increase in any crime outside of the Casino, oh yeah, and everyone that works there speaks english. I think the point was to ask us all to use a little common sense when evaluating Foxwoods claims.
Jeff | 2013-08-05 07:25:29
Mr. Driscoll, a very good article, and an important concern, It is very important not to fall into the us-versus-them mind set. I would argue, the argument against the Casino is more complex however. One of the major concerns is traffic. While much of the traffic would come from 495, as you say, the congestion on 16 and 126 would certainly not improve. Another concern is the "them," not the Casio workers or many of the clients, but a subset of its clientele. These are not the most productive members of society, and would probably not make the mothers in Braggville feel very safe. It is impossible for Holliston to help these people, and they will only cause harm. Another point you mention is property values. This is the biggest reason many in Holliston oppose the Casino. People are always trying to protect their property value though; it is not isolated to the Casino. It is a reason for better schools, smother roads, more woodland conservation, extra-curricular programs, and many other things. Can you blame people for protecting their assets? A house is many people's largest investment. Another argument against the Casino is there is no real compelling argument to support a Casino near Holliston. It will not help local business. Nor will it increase municipal revenue. So while it is easy to see the opposition to the Casino as an us-versus-them problem, I think reality is more complex.
James R. | 2013-08-05 07:03:18
I agree with Jeff when he sais the issue is not anti-foreign born. This isn't a situation in which there is, say, a new dentist,or shop keeper,or mechanic in town who happens to be foreign and we're all trying to run him/her out of town with pitch forks and torches. We're talking about a massive building project that will bring in massive amounts of illegal labor. Its not uncommon when massive building projects are over for the massive amounts of illegals to stay. That will change our community and schools over night. People like to romanticize the thought of "diversity" from afar, yet those same people chose not to live in or have their children educated in a community with large amounts of non English speakers. Why is that?
Frank L. | 2013-08-05 06:46:03
I think the most glaring error in this piece is the idea that traffic would not be affected because of a new 495 interchange. I think this is short-sighted at best. The traffic will dramatically increase on a road that is already almost unbearable for commuters (both 16 AND 495).
traffic matters | 2013-08-05 06:19:10
Hi, Tom. No offense, but it seems unfair to reduce opposition to a casino on the town line to something similar to Know Nothing "jealous, spiteful" bigotry. For those of us who Know Something about casinos in general, and this project in particular, there is good reason for concern on many levels. My mother and sister live in Southeastern Connecticut near the casinos, and they have nothing good to say about the experience, nor are they bigots. I would respectfully suggest a little more research.
Dianna Vosburg | 2013-08-05 06:13:38
I think you make a large and unfair leap suggesting that the real reason people are against the casino is veiled racism. Many people are against the casino proposal for the reasons that you dismiss much to quickly in my opinion. I am against the casino for those reasons. That being said I too am troubled by the "not in our schools" reason being put forth by some. I just called the superintendent's office in Foxborough. They have just 1 ESL teacher. Hardly enough to break the bank. Even if some costs were increased, its the well-worth price we pay for being an open and inclusive community.
Elizabeth Dembitzer | 2013-08-05 06:10:13
Judging from the amount of time you put into this pro-casino screed, Tom, I'd say you need a lawn to better occupy yourself.
tpartynitiwt | 2013-08-05 05:49:30
I grew up an hour from Atlantic City. You say an hour Is far enough away, however, I watched surrounding towns go down hill and fast. The school systems changed, drastically. My school needed to hire a security guard. We wmded ip haning split seasion classes die to tje jnflux of people and jot enough teachers. Having a casino proposed for approximately 10-15 minutes from my home makes me nervous. The traffic down 16 is ready bad, just because their going to be off of 495, how many people will come locally and take "back roads" due to traffic on 495!
Holliston resident | 2013-08-05 05:27:49
The school issue is not anti-foreign born, nor even the large influx of new students projected. It is the resulting need to find and hire many new bilingual teachers, or teachers specially trained to teach English as a second language (up to 30 different languages as reported near Foxwoods. That translates into sudden, significant higher costs/taxes for people who have no vote in the siting decision.
Jeff Weise | 2013-08-05 04:32:14