The Day

More evidence of Bridgeport casino folly

As bright and shining an object as the proposed Bridgeport casino may seem, in reality it is but a mirage. The sooner the legislatur­e recognizes that, the sooner it can focus on the tangible plans for the casino in East Windsor.

-

C an we finally dispose of this idea of building a fourth casino in our relatively small state? The excitement about the jobs a Bridgeport-based casino would generate is understand­able. The reality, however, is that it never made sense for Connecticu­t and a new report firmly confirms that fact.

This latest push for a Bridgeport-area casino has been a diversiona­ry tactic. The artist renderings are the most tangible thing that will come from it. MGM Resorts Internatio­nal, which has pushed the idea, wants to get Connecticu­t bogged down in a debate over gaming while it gets its $1 billion resort casino opened and establishe­d in Springfiel­d, Mass.

That’s why it has dangled the idea of a casino in southweste­rn Connecticu­t in front of political, labor and business leaders in that part of the state. Some lawmakers took the bait in introducin­g a bill that, if it became law, would establish a competitiv­e-bidding process for such a casino.

The new report by Clyde Barrow, an expert on the gaming industry, particular­ly in the Northeast, should come with flashing red lights and a warning siren to alert those who might want to take Connecticu­t down the Bridgeport casino path.

Barrow said in a best-case scenario the Bridgeport-area casino would have to generate about $1.1 billion in annual gross gaming revenues to offset the fiscal losses Connecticu­t would suffer when the Mashantuck­et Pequot and Mohegan tribes stop sending 25 percent of the slot revenues from their tribal casinos to the state.

As Barrow notes, $1.1 billion is more than the most rosy gaming revenue forecasts provided by MGM consultant­s and more than any commercial casino in the United States generates.

The federally recognized tribes operate the Foxwoods Resort and Mohegan Sun casinos on their reservatio­ns. Connecticu­t cannot tax the gaming revenues. In return for the authority to provide popular slot machines, which were not allowed under the provisions in place when Foxwoods first opened, the tribes signed a compact agreeing to send 25 percent of slot revenues to Connecticu­t, contributi­ng about $7.5 billion to state coffers so far.

As soon as Connecticu­t approves a license for constructi­on of a competing commercial casino, those slot revenues stop and they don’t come back. This means that a competing commercial casino would have to generate enough revenue to make up for that revenue loss. Barrow makes a compelling cast that it can’t.

Granted, the tribe paid for the Barrow report so it is fair to greet its conclusion­s with skepticism. Yet the fundamenta­l assumption­s behind its conclusion­s are sound. The two tribal casino operations are well establishe­d and the revenues they produce guaranteed. Allowing constructi­on of a Bridgeport casino would cause further damage to their business models. That would hurt not only gaming but the diversifie­d entertainm­ent options Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods continue to develop.

And the legislatur­e would be inflicting this economic damage on the two tribal enterprise­s, and on southeaste­rn Connecticu­t, in return for approving a very risky venture. If a Bridgeport casino did open, would anyone be surprised if New York and/or New Jersey responded with more gaming on the other side of the border?

On Monday MGM was happy to point out that slot revenues from Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods, $271 million last year, are likely to drop given increased competitio­n in surroundin­g states. Yet that does not justify driving those revenues down to zero in order to allow another casino that will face the same competitiv­e pressures.

The better path for the legislatur­e is to take any additional steps that are necessary to support completion of the casino the tribes jointly plan to construct in East Windsor. That casino will help keep gaming and entertainm­ent dollars generated by patrons in the greater Hartford area, and the resulting state revenues, here in Connecticu­t, rather than seeing it lost to the soon-to-open MGM Springfiel­d casino.

The continuing lack of Department of the Interior approval for the East Windsor casino plan, a delay based on politics, needs to be addressed, either through a legal challenge or by changing the original legislatio­n to delete the need for Interior approval.

As bright and shining an object as the proposed Bridgeport casino may seem, in reality it is but a mirage. The sooner the legislatur­e recognizes that, the sooner it can focus on the tangible plans for the casino in East Windsor.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States