Tribes guarantee slot revenue in push for third state casino

HARTFORD >> A day after a top lawmaker gave them a 50-50 chance of getting permission to build their first commercial casino off tribal land, the leaders of Connecticut’s two federally recognized tribes visited the Capitol Thursday to guarantee the state’s share of slot revenues.

House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz, D-Berlin, gave the proposed East Windsor casino a 50-50 chance again Thursday after the Mohegan and Mashantucket Pequot tribes sent a letter to lawmakers guaranteeing its existing slot revenue arrangement with the state. The guarantee of slot revenue from its existing two casinos on tribal land was helpful, but it didn’t necessarily change the odds.

The legislation giving the two tribes permission to move forward says they won’t go forward if the Bureau of Indian Affairs doesn’t approve an amendment to the revenue sharing agreement to allow for a third casino.

Mohegan Tribal Chairman Kevin Brown put the odds of BIA approval at 99 percent. Mashantucket Pequot Chairman Rodney Butler said that in the history of the BIA, “they never have revoked a compact.”

Brown said if the BIA says they can’t go forward with a third casino, then it’s “a done deal.”

However, “I don’t know if that makes it a slam dunk,” Aresimowicz said. “I still think it’s a 50-50 proposition.”

He said it makes them more comfortable as they deliberate the legislation going forward.

“With the development of a third casino operated jointly by Mohegan and Pequot, we are committed to guaranteeing our existing slot revenue arrangement with the State and are proposing compact amendments that will ensure those revenue streams are preserved,” the Mohegan and Mashantucket Pequot Tribes said in a joint letter. “SB 957 does not jeopardize this revenue sharing, because it is expressly conditioned on approval of the Tribes’ proposed compact amendments.”

In a visit to the Capitol press room, Aresimowicz said the letter the tribes sent lawmakers Thursday “allows us to have a discussion in an easier way when we’re not really worried about gambling with folks’ money.”

But it doesn’t resolve all of the issues, including the legal ones pointed out last month by Attorney General George Jepsen.

Aresimowicz had said that Jepsen’s letter makes it “difficult” for lawmakers to move forward.

What’s still not clear is how much the state is willing to spend on a legal defense against questions that it violated the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause by failing to put the rights to build a commercial casino out to bid. At the moment, there’s no clear path around that based on the legislation approved by the Public Safety and Security Committee.

COURTESY OF MMCT