Business & Tech

No Slots Tewksbury Ramps Up Efforts Ahead of Special Town Meeting

Two members of the group opposed to the proposed Merrimack Valley Casino speak about their concerns of having a slots-only casino in Tewksbury.


In the weeks since a host community agreement was signed between Penn National Gaming and the town of Tewksbury for the proposed slots-only casino at 300 Ames Pond Drive, a group of residents have organized in opposition to the proposal. 

"No Slots Tewksbury," emerging first on Facebook, has since continued to organize a campaign against the proposed Merrimack Valley Casino; on Wednesday, their website went live.

Residents will vote at an Aug. 20 special Town Meeting on whether to approve proposed amendments to the zoning bylaw, and until then, members of No Slots Tewksbury will be working hard to get opponents of the proposal out to vote, according to No Slots member Bruce Panilaitis.

"We don't have the time to do a full educational plan to bring voters from one side to the other," Panilaitis said. "Our focus right now is on getting one-third plus one at special Town Meeting on Aug. 20."

Panilaitis said the group has been printing out "No Slots" signs, going door to door talking to residents about the proposal and reminding them to get out to vote on Aug. 20. 

The proposed amendments to town zoning bylaw would require a two-thirds majority to pass at special Town Meeting, then sending the proposal to a town referendum on Saturday, Sept. 21.

Panilaitis said he believes the character of Tewksbury would change forever were the proposed slots-only casino to receive approval. 

"Tewksbury would immediately become 'the slots town,' " Panilaitis said. "When my wife and I were looking for a town to live in, if Tewksbury had a slots parlor we wouldn't have chosen it. If this were to pass I believe there would be a flight of people moving out of town, including us. "

Expansion from a slots-only casino to one with a full offering of tables games and other gaming experiences is a concern for Panilaitis and other members of No Slots Tewksbury. 

"I'm originally from Connecticut. I remember when Foxwoods was a little bingo parlor on the side of Route 2, and I know what it looks like now," Panilaitis said. "If it were to get through the process the first time, I have to assume a change or expansion would get through as well."

Panilaitis, a resident of Foster Road, said he believes the revenue the town would received from proposed slots-only casino would not be worth the harm the facility could do to local business and in lowering property values. 

"I think this in the end would make [the town's] revenue problems worse due to people leaving town, people not considering Tewksbury when looking for a community to move to and the negative impact it would have on other local businesses," Panilaitis said.

As outlined in the host community agreement, Penn National Gaming would annual pay Tewksbury a mitigation payment of $1 million, $120,000 contributions to fund Tewksbury's capital expenditures and an estimated $3 million in property tax. 

While Panilaitis is opposed to the proposed Merrimack Valley Casino at 300 Ames Pond Drive, he said he understands why the Board of Selectmen moved forward with a host community agreement with Penn National Gaming. 

"If the Selectmen had voted against moving forward with this proposal, I wouldn't have been unhappy, but I understand the pressure they're under to generate revenue," Panilaitis said. "Had they made that decision on their own, they would have been subject to criticism from the other side. I think they're mistaken, but I understand where they're coming from."

Panilaitis noted that, should the slots proposal be defeated, opponents of the proposal have to be prepared to support Selectmen in moving forward with other plans to generate revenue for the town. 

"When we're done with this we're going to have to turn around and help the Selectmen with other ways to generate more revenue," Panilaitis said. "If we're not going to allow this we have to be ready to support them in other avenues."

You can read Panilaitis's blog here outlining his opposition to the proposed slots-only casino but support for Selectmen. 

In speaking to other residents about the proposed Merrimack Valley Casino, Panilaitis said he has received a mixed response of support and disapproval.

Panilaitis said the thought of moving out of town is hard to contemplate, but something he would seriously consider should the proposed Merrimack Valley Casino receive approval.

"I've been tied to this community and been living here for 13 years, and the notion of having to sell my house, which we just put an addition on, is not an attractive consideration, but that's the situation we would be in should this go through," Panilaitis said. 

Al Barchard, also a member of No Slots Tewksbury, said the issue for him isn't with gambling, it's with the possibility of a casino being built in Tewksbury. 

"Tewksbury is clearly getting short changed in this deal," Barchard said. "When a slot parlor goes in, money spent at a slots parlor is money not spent at other businesses in Tewksbury. When you say yes to one thing, you say no to another."

Barchard said he believes the estimated $3 million the town would collect annually in property taxes is a rosy projection.

"In order to obtain $3 million in property tax, the assessed value of the property would have to be approximately $117 million," Barchard said. "If you look at the other largest properties in town, they are not valued at $117 million. A slot parlor with 1,250 machines would never have an assessed value so high."

In speaking with residents about the proposed slots-only casino, Barchard said he has received a mixed reaction.

"The reaction we've gotten has been mixed," Barchard said. "I think that comes from the fact the host community agreement was signed so fast. A lot of people were away on vacation and are just coming back."

Barchard said the short timeline between the introduction of the proposal to residents in early July and the special Town Meeting vote on Aug. 20 is not enough time for residents to become completely educated on the proposal.

"There were no traffic or impact studies presented at the outset, it's all been after the fact," Barchard said. "The townspeople should have had that information before any sort of agreement was reached."

A traffic impact study by Penn National is currently underway, and the company would fund any mitigation needed as a result of that study.

Barchard said he felt a host community agreement should have been signed only after residents had information on the potential impacts to Tewksbury in front of them. 

"I think we should have had 100 percent of the information from the impact studies," Barchard said. "It should have been done after Labor Day when people are around to receive the information and make an educated decision on all the issues. Only at that point should the Board of Selectmen considered reaching the host community agreement."

No Slots Tewksbury will hold an informational meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 13 at 7 p.m. at Tewksbury Country Club. Speakers will include State Rep. James Miceli, former State Senator Sue Tucker and Psychologist Tom Larkin. 



Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here