On July 16, MGM Resorts International will go before the voters of Springfield, Massachusetts, for approval as the city’s 
designated casino applicant. There’s no reason not to expect the company to win the election. However, the voters’ choice might get backhanded by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, which has promised to spend the summer looking into all areas — i.e., Macao — where MGM does business. The infamous “unsuitability” finding of Pansy 
Ho and MGM’s subsequent exit from Atlantic City hangs heavily on the process, of course. So does the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement‘s position that it’s going to take however long it takes to resolve their own issues vis-a-vis MGM and that Massachusetts isn’t their problem. Bottom line: The Bay State is in the awkward position of holding elections on casino companies that haven’t been approved by the state …
… and might never be. Selectman-cum-sleuth Ben Palleiko has been digging up dirt on executives of Foxwoods Resort Casino, which wants to open a satellite property in Milford. Palleiko’s accusations may not be enough to give Massachusetts regulators pause but Foxwoods’ crushing debt load surely will.
