Foxwoods to Increase Size of Milford Casino Development, Payments

Foxwoods Massachusetts has told Milford officials it will increase the size of the Milford casino development, in part to remain competitive with the Suffolk Downs proposal in East Boston.

The redesign is expected to incorporate some 200 more hotel rooms and an expanded gaming floor, and will result in taller buildings on the nearly 200-acre site, according to Selectmen Brian Murray and Bill Buckley, who said in phone interviews Thursday they were told about the changes Wednesday by the town's attorneys.

Foxwoods also is planning to increase its mitigation payments to Milford, as part of the plan, said selectmen. That's in response to pressure put on the developer to contribute more to the community, more along the lines of what is being promised to Everett, and now Boston, said selectmen.

In a meeting Tuesday, Buckley had told the town's attorneys negotiating with Foxwoods that he wanted "Everett money" for Milford, a reference to the generous amount of up-front and continuing payments that Wynn Resort Casinos has agreed to pay that city for hosting its casino.

On Tuesday, the day after Milford selectmen reviewed an initial draft of a host agreement with Foxwoods, Boston Mayor Tom Menino announced a deal with Caesar's for redevelopment of the Suffolk Downs racetrack in East Boston.

That deal includes a minimum of $32 million a year in taxes, plus $33.4 million in an upfront payment to East Boston.

By comparison, as of Monday, the Foxwoods MA plan proposed $18 million a year in tax payments to Milford, plus $15 million toward a community fund.

Only one of the three casino projects for greater Boston will get a license from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. The commission website has a list of host community agreements signed to date. The Boston plan is not on the site yet.

The new Foxwoods plan is expected to be made available to Milford Selectmen for review by Friday, said Buckley, who is chairman of the board. He said he would release it to the public when he receives it.

The selectmen both said they were told the footprint of the development would not change. Instead, Foxwoods Massachusetts plans to add more floors to the hotel and gaming structures.

Selectmen said they were told the casino would be larger than the "Phase I" plan that was presented to Milford residents and selectmen in June and July, at a series of community meetings, but smaller than the full-build out described then as "Phase II."

The Phase I plan, what was proposed this summer, was to include 4,250 slot machines, 875 table seats, 500 poker seats, a 350-room hotel and a 1,400-seat ballroom.

Foxwoods, contacted Thursday night by email, declined to comment on the changes. "Since the agreement is an ongoing negotiation we do not feel it's appropriate to discuss it publicly at this time," a spokesman said.

Buckley said the changes have not been vetted by town officials, including department heads or consultants who were asked to review and explain the impact of the development on traffic, water, sewer and other town services, including public safety. The new plan also hasn't been presented to town residents, Buckley said.

"The community, the board, the department heads, have yet to see what their plan is. Here we are on Labor Day weekend," he said. 

The sudden decision to increase the project size and amenities, and presumably revenue, was made following public disclosure of the Boston and Suffolk Downs proposal. "They're looking inept, and acting desperate," Buckley said.

Murray, however, characterized the change in development size as the result of ongoing negotiations. Because Buckley demanded, essentially, more revenue for mitigation, he said, the developer has responded by increasing the size of the project. The revealing of Boston's much-larger casino plan, he said, undoubtedly also affected the decision.

Murray said he's asked the town's attorneys to prepare a memo that will explain whether the consultants hired by the town reviewed the impact of the casino at full build-out, or "Phase II," in order to make sure the town has had a chance to review the impacts of a larger casino.

"And if not, what is the difference," he said.

It is not too late, he said, for the developer to change the size of the casino development. "Absolutely not," he said. "People are losing sight of the fact that we are negotiating. When you are negotiating, by its very definition, the position of the parties change."

The Gaming Commission will evaluate the resort casino applications approved by the host towns based on five broad criteria. The specific requirements are listed on its website.