Roll The Dice! Time To Expand State Casinos

Slot machines

Connecticut is surrounded by casino interlopers. To the north, to the south, to the east and west. New York City has a casino in Queens, Governor Deval Patrick led the charge for gaming in Massachusetts. Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee is studying the impact of Bay State casinos on Rhode Island casinos. It’s time for Governor Dannel Malloy and legislative leaders to reopen the gaming discussion in the legislative session that begins in January. What’s the point of Connecticut’s tribal nations owning a monopoly if the state is cannibalizing revenues?

When Governor Lowell Weicker cut the deal 20 years ago with the Mashantucket Pequot Nation for 25 percent of the slot take in exchange for exclusivity he based his decision on limiting proliferation. That was then, this is now. Gaming proliferation is all around our borders. Wouldn’t it be in the state and tribal nation’s interests to revisit the gaming compacts with two of the most most successful casinos in the western hemisphere squeezed by competition?

Let’s create competition within the state. Expand casinos to the state’s largest city that was denied by the legislature in 1995. Place a casino in Hartford. Heck, give one to New Haven if they want one.

In 1995 just about every major casino player was involved in the gaming expansion debate for Bridgeport including Donald Trump whom I represented as a media consultant. Back then Trump’s attitude was if I cannot have a Connecticut casino I want to kill expansion. Would Donald come back to play? The State Senate, led by opposition from Connecticut’s Gold Coast legislators, torpedoed the gaming bill for Bridgeport. Republican Governor John Rowland had publicly supported a casino for Bridgeport but he either didn’t have the juice with members of his own party to pass it or just outright tanked it.

The state needs new revenue sources and jobs. More taxes isn’t the answer. We’re taxed to the gills. Governor Malloy and the legislature should keep an open mind on gaming expansion. It’s better than crapping out to other states.

0
Share

15 comments

  1. Hey Lennie,
    Can you say Media Consultant with a straight face? Weren’t you actually serving as the “doorman” for Trump trying to open doors that might otherwise be closed to him?

    0
  2. Tom Lombard is right. Start with the fact Bridgeport has no jobs. A Casino with off-track betting, table-games-only Casinos and Sports book parlors along with Hotels/ Entertainment centers would bring in thousand of jobs overnight and Tax revenues in the millions. We don’t need slot machines, we need a new industry and that’s gaming, RFP Trump and Wynn. New York State has six racinos and next year Aqueduct will be the seventh.

    As of 2006, racinos are legal in nine states: Delaware, Louisiana, Maine, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia. The first racino in Pennsylvania opened in November 2006. West Virginia pioneered the concept when MTR Gaming Group was allowed to introduce video lottery terminals (VLTs) to Mountaineer Race Track & Gaming Resort in Chester. Delaware, Rhode Island, and West Virginia, all members of the Multi-State Lottery Association (MUSL; best known for Powerball); in fact, jointly run a jackpot VLT game, Ca$hola.

    Bridgeport, Casino jobs (include (but certainly aren’t limited to):
    Baccarat Dealers,
    Bingo Callers,
    Blackjack Dealers,
    Cage Cashiers,
    Casino Floor,
    Casino Hosts,
    Casino Managers,
    Change Attendants,
    Craps Dealers,
    Craps Boxmen,
    Craps Stickmen,
    Craps Floormen,
    Hard Count Attendants,
    Keno Writers,
    Keno Runners,
    Pai Gow Dealers,
    Pit Clerks,
    Pit Supervisors,
    Poker Dealers,
    Race Book Cashiers,
    Race Book Ticket Writers,
    Roulette Dealers,
    Hotel workers,
    Surveillance Officers, and
    Uniformed Security.

    0
    1. Don’t forget The Call Girl Industry there Ronin! Business will be booming for them. I really don’t think Bridgeport needs any encouragement to become the next Atlantic City.

      0
  3. Firstly to have legalized casino gaming there must be something in it for the corrupt state politicians. If the legislators from the big cities of Hartford, New Haven and Bridgeport were to join forces for legalization of it for those municipalities that wanted it by going on TV and Radio it would force that ASS Malloy to deal with it. Get the minority communities who are really being screwed by this economy to join with the majority of residents to have weekly demonstrations at Malloy’s office. Demonstrate at the mayor’s office to move on this issue. This must be ongoing, not a one-time dog and pony show. Go to Trump, Wynn and Harrah’s to get funding for a real push. The need for jobs is only relevant when it comes to those human pieces of garbage in Hartford.

    0
  4. Stop wasting your breath. Remember Jai Alai? OTB? Look, discussing the same issue over and over again is just beating a horse to death. Casinos in Bridgeport will never happen. It should never happen. Of course should it ever happen you can be sure it will open and close and become Public Housing a year later. Trump bought the Jenkin Valve building that now houses the Arena at Harboryard. The city foreclosed on him. Steve Wynn doesn’t need to look at Bridgeport. The developers of Steelepointe would be wasting their time and more importantly the residents of the city if they think they can hold up development for a casino. It will not pass and should not pass. It will be in fact Bridgeport’s final destination. People will in fact just use Bridgeport as a bathroom and gamble and just move on and all local restaurants will dry up. Welfare recipients will enjoy their luck at gambling and low-life prostitutes will walk Seaview Avenue. It is 2012 in the 21st century. The excitement of casinos died in the late ’80s with Disco. Think outside the box and stop humoring the dreamers of yesteryear. Casinos in Bridgeport is a dead horse. Treat it as such. Do not even start a rumor that will hold up Steelepointe. Those developers had better get busy. The BRBC had better not even support such a sad regurgitation of a bad idea that died. Was I ranting? Good!!!!!!!!!

    0
      1. Over the past 27 years I have thought of many. I have met Donald Trump and Steve Wynn. 27 years ago I was excited about the idea of spectacular casinos in Bridgeport. I gave up on that concept a very long time ago. That ship has sailed. We need real development that will benefit the entire region that will also take advantage of the waterfront. There is not any contiguous acreage in Bridgeport left. Casinos are not the answer. Corporate towers and housing, conference centers and marinas, magnet schools and restaurants, parks and recreations, Tourist center and entertainment complexes. Etc. etc. etc.

        0
  5. Every teacher, paraprofessional or part-time grandmotherly type at Blackham School received a check for $250 from Lone Pine Foundation of Greenwich.
    blog.ctnews.com/education/2011/11/01/franklin-school-wins-lone-pine-competition/

    Guess who’s connected to Lone Pine …

    “A consultant for a Greenwich billionaire interested in education reform was advocating behind the scenes for charter changes that would give the mayor control of the Bridgeport school board at the same time that local and city officials were also looking to reconstitute the board, email correspondence released to Hearst Connecticut Newspapers revealed.”

    Meghan Lowney, famous secret emailer!
    www .dailykos.com/story/2011/08/04/1003030/-Billionaire-attempts-takeover-of-Bridgeport,-CT-Ed-Board-

    0
  6. Auerbach is on the money … The Casino ship has sailed. I supported it at the time and was furious at the hypocritical politicians from the rest of the State and Hartford.

    But it’s gone … And eternally optimistic, I believe 2012 is going to see positive development for Bridgeport.

    As to Sue’s comment–Good for the Blackham teachers getting $250! And the Mayor should have control. That’s what Bloomberg went for in NYC because it makes sense.

    0
  7. “And the Mayor should have control. That’s what Bloomberg went for in NYC because it makes sense.”

    FBD,
    Does it make sense because Finch and Bloomberg are equally great executives with significant managerial experience? Perhaps because they are both as wealthy and earning total incomes greater than at any other time of their lives? Or for some other reason that “makes sense” to you but is not so obvious to interested others?

    And have you looked at what of necessity or fatefully passes through the City Attorney office with little predictability for seeing it come out the other side once it enters this side??? Some say it’s because the office is understaffed! Some say it is because Mark Anastasi performs as Manager of the Office as well as doing significant legal work, thereby eliminating one salary? If true, this may be a false economy for people waiting for word on their issue or legal question. And others say Mark is loyal to the reigning Mayor and if that is true, that may not be the same thing as to the public interest of all the people of Bridgeport. In that case maybe the issue never surfaces in a timely manner???

    In the matters of BOE and more central control as well as consideration of the City Attorney office, the concentration of power, authority and/or responsibility may look like the way to get things done, but it may not work that way if you are looking for open, accountable and transparent governance.

    0
  8. BEACON2, you have touched the “Third Rail” when you mention the City Attorney Mark Anastasi. That should be a separate subject topic all by itself. It is long past the time the Bridgeport Common Council has its own separate attorney to advise them on legal issues.

    0
  9. Ron,
    Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.
    And per your notice, I shall stand far from the subway tracks when I venture into NYC, lest I get accidentally bumped.

    Perhaps Lennie will choose to make the City Attorney a separate topic in the near future. I have found so much info flows into that office, though not necessarily out of it, as might be expected of a professional law firm, that there must be people who are dissatisfied, at a minimum. I also observe an ignorance in parts of government of what the Charter or Ordinances call for. Yet we spend lots on City attorneys, settlements, outside attorneys and other related professional services. And get to ask the question: For what???

    City Council does not have a separate attorney and that certainly can be an impediment if they attempt to serve as a “check and balance” to the executive branch, as some suggest. Of course it may be argued an independent counsel for that body would put the President of the body (as an attorney with matters from his specialty at least) in a conflicted position at times.

    The Ethics Commission does not have outside counsel (who might possibly have provided them with advice on their ordinance issue last month in a timely fashion) as well as allowed legal representation in what is a specialty. How does our City Attorney office not have a “conflict of interest” in seeing an Ethics Commission become “stronger” to serve the public interest, and have a place in our governance calling for increased levels of integrity from all parts of the body politic?

    And personal observation in recent years of certain land use bodies indicated a much clearer and responsible process when outside counsel from NYC was present. The public received a more open and transparent view of the process.

    So Ron, while we are at Thanksgiving festivities tomorrow and before a nap creeps up on us, perhaps we can daydream a bit and write Lennie with a new topic (in addition to Mark Anastasi, City Attorney) and that subject might be: What other “third-rail issues” are present in Bridgeport City governance???

    The answers might be provocative. Time will tell.

    0

Leave a Reply