The Phase 2 application periods are now closed. This page is for informational purposes only.
What You Need to Know
- The RFA-2, consisting of more than 200 questions, details an applicant’s site-specific proposal
- Each Commissioner took one of five categories of criteria and rated the quality of each applicants’ responses
- The Commission conducted similar evaluation processes for each resort-casino license and the slots-parlor license
About RFA-2 Applications
The RFA-2 application is the applicant’s ‘site specific’ proposal. The RFA-2 application may only be submitted by applicants that have received a positive determination of suitability from the Commission in accordance with 205 CMR 115.05(3).
This RFA-2 application form was designed by MassGaming as a vehicle for each applicant to demonstrate that it has thought broadly and creatively about creating an innovative and unique gaming establishment in Massachusetts that will create a synergy with, and provide a significant and lasting benefit to, the residents of the host community, the surrounding communities, the region, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and will deliver an overall experience that draws both residents and tourists to the gaming establishment and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
RFA-2 applications were first reviewed and processed by the investigators for completeness and areas of confidentiality. MGC then begins the RFA-2 Evaluation Process for each application’s site-specific plan.
Each of the five Commissioners led a team of industry experts to evaluate each gaming proposal based on more than 200 questions addressing the Commission’s key evaluation categories.
- Chairman Steve Crosby: Overview / General
What about this license applicant’s project will make the project unique in the industry, make it a unique destination, reinforce the Massachusetts-brand and positively impact the Commonwealth?
- Commissioner Enrique Zuniga: Finance
Will the project meet the estimated revenue projections, does the proponent have suitable financing to complete the project and will they spend the required minimum investment?
- Commissioner Bruce Stebbins: Economic Development
How the project maximizes a positive impact on area visitor attractions, supports small business in the region and creates viable and meaningful pathways for employment?
- Commissioner Lloyd MacDonald: Building and Site Design
Does the building meet requirements for energy efficiency, have a design that integrates itself into the community and meet permitting requirements?
- Commissioner Gayle Cameron: Mitigation
How does the proponent solve traffic problems, address problem gambling, minimize its impact on the Lottery and mitigate any problems with the host and surrounding communities?
Each Commissioner and his or her Evaluation Team reviewed each of the Applicant’s responses to the RFA-2 questions, and rated the quality of the Applicant’s responses as follows:
Response failed to present a clear plan to address the topic, or failed to meet the minimum acceptable criteria of the Commission.
Response provided was comprehensible and met the minimum acceptable criteria of the Commission; and/or provided the required or requested information.
- Very Good
Response was comprehensive, demonstrates credible experience and plans, and/or excels in some areas.
Response was of uniformly high quality, and demonstrates convincing experience, creative thinking, innovative plans and a substantially unique approach.
In keeping with the Commission’s effort to ensure a fair, transparent and participatory process, the Commission took into account public comments given to the Commission at public hearings in potential host and surrounding communities, as well as through mail and at firstname.lastname@example.org.The Commission considered these public comments as it deliberated and decided on the licenses.
Submitted RFA-2 Applications
Below please find the public portions of the RFA-2 applications. Note: These documents represent the public portions of the applications.
Please note: The Applications are best viewed in Adobe Acrobat Reader. Clicking on the Attachments will direct visitors to a Dropbox site best viewed in Internet Explorer 8.0 or later, Google Chrome (any version), Safari 3.0 or later, Firefox 3.0 or later, or Opera 9.0 or later.
Category 1 (resort-casino) applications:
- Mass Gaming & Entertainment, LLC: Application | Attachments
- Wynn MA, LLC: Application | Attachments | Option Agreement
- Mohegan Sun MA: Application | Attachments | Ground Lease | Summaries
- MGM Springfield: Application | Attachments
Category 2 (slots-parlor) applications:
- Penn National Gaming
- PPE / The Cordish Companies
- Raynham Park
It is the policy of the Commission that Applicant Materials pertaining to unsuccessful applicants for the Category 2 gaming establishment license be removed from the Commission website upon the award of the Category 2 gaming establishment license. These materials will be retained for the period specified in the Commission’s record retention policy and, during that period, archived and available upon request.
The Applicant Materials for the successful Category 2 applicant/licensee will remain available on the website for a period of 1 year after the award of the Category 2 license. The actual Category 2 determination to issue a license will remain on the Commission website for the entire term of the Category 2 license.
To learn more about submitting a Public Record Request, please click here.
Gaming License Decisions
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission voted to award the category 2 (slots-parlor) license to Springfield Gaming and Redevelopment (Penn National Gaming) on February 28, 2014. To view the evaluation presentations and video of the deliberations, click here.
Category 1 / Region B
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission voted to award the category 1 (resort-casino) license in Region B to Blue Tarp reDevelopment, LLC (MGM Springfield) on June 13, 2014. To view the evaluation presentations and video of the deliberations, click here.
Category 1 / Region A
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission voted to award the category 1 (resort-casino) license in Region A to Wynn MA, LLC on September 18, 2014. To view the evaluation presentations and video of the deliberations, click here.
Category 1 / Region C
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission voted to decline award of the category 1 (resort-casino) license in Region C on April 28, 2016. To view the evaluation presentations and video of the deliberations, click here.